{"id":"W2034225918","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoenv.2005.08.007","title":"Probabilistic ecological hazard assessment: Evaluating pharmaceutical effects on aquatic higher plants as an example","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety","topic":"Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":73,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Guelph","funders":"","keywords":"Aquatic toxicology; Microcosm; Hazard analysis; Macrophyte; Toxicity; Toxicology; Hazard; Environmental science; Biology; Ecology; Chemistry","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007992615,0.0004519789,0.0004014478,0.00003601931,0.000508455,0.00003825406,0.0002848811,0.0002848519,0.01786682],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003867913,0.0003808548,0.0001027883,0.00006561128,0.0008304065,0.0003963147,0.0004347245,0.0005883392,0.00300584],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006920731,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001099878,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00002550277,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00003871293,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9966182,0.0006211514,0.0004468314,0.0009709275,0.0004900106,0.0008529566],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982007,0.0006336076,0.0001148197,0.0003238271,5.215715e-7,0.0007265705],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001470638,0.01024813,0.1583791,0.00008698122,0.0002453393,0.0003270196,0.0007200852,0.005891096,0.3455626,0.001597272,0.0009696543,0.4745021],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003463259,0.003332447,0.9262533,0.0000331334,0.0001465292,0.0001472544,0.00007884514,0.02710764,0.01584622,0.001973537,0.02077976,0.0008380327],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.984964,0.00006036757,0.00003239755,0.001065128,0.0002094118,0.0008255053,0.00002161854,0.00007947795,0.01274213],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9911121,0.0001879613,0.001106678,0.006448,0.0001804181,0.00005049767,0.00007668319,0.00003687721,0.0008007489],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7678742,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998643,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.04972917192484915,"score_gpt":0.3435692672682469,"score_spread":0.2938400953433977,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}