{"id":"W2073976109","doi":"10.3390/ani3030907","title":"Critical Analysis of Assessment Studies of the Animal Ethics Review Process","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Animals","topic":"Animal testing and alternatives","field":"Veterinary","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; International Foundation for Ethical Research","keywords":"Animal ethics; Process (computing); Authorization; Outcome (game theory); Quality (philosophy); Computer science; Management science; Risk analysis (engineering); Engineering ethics; Medicine; Political science; Engineering; Law","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007235535,0.0001195789,0.0005367383,0.00005695657,0.00008409324,0.00001035364,0.0002774791,0.00004455404,0.0003032401],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003145547,0.00007343609,0.0002107413,0.0005793504,0.0003277618,0.0001000204,0.0001405361,0.0002399138,0.000009466698],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001471167,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005638884,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0000783908,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000004079738,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985319,0.0002766915,0.0004601915,0.0001989656,0.0003791081,0.0001531579],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973854,0.001238415,0.0002472288,0.0002503058,0.0008470847,0.00003150502],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002780891,0.001614613,0.494842,0.03487337,0.01295198,0.00005154009,0.01134022,0.00003557836,0.3238181,0.1101538,0.005960143,0.004080633],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001453035,0.002134067,0.9804371,0.004135589,0.002685759,0.00001296257,0.002792652,0.001075998,0.002931287,0.003227751,0.0001501029,0.0002714519],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9839448,0.01070069,0.00002769998,0.002088054,0.00002924598,0.0002144634,0.00002002734,0.00002406413,0.002950995],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976081,0.001137867,0.000796598,0.00034797,0.00002487266,0.0000344197,8.319932e-7,0.000009226023,0.00004015559],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4855951,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3765741,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.4643124314746182,"score_gpt":0.5873805755821943,"score_spread":0.123068144107576,"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."}}