Managing our urban forest : what do officials and managers think and need? A case study from the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There have been several highly significant achievements in the area of alternatives for skin corrosivity testing in the last three years, most notably: (a) the validation, and subsequent endorsement, of two replacement alternative tests for skin corrosivity (the rat skin transcutaneous electrical resistance [TER] and EPISKINtrade mark human skin model assays) by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM); (b) an evaluation of the proposed OECD testing strategy for skin corrosion/irritation as it relates to the classification of corrosives; (c) completion of a successful prevalidation study on the use of the EpiDermtrade mark human skin model for corrosivity testing; (d) a review of CORROSITEXtrade mark by the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) in the US; and (e) the submission of draft new test guidelines on skin corrosion to the OECD Secretariat and EU National Coordinators (Annex V test methods). It is now hoped that regulatory acceptance of the validated in vitro tests for skin corrosivity, at both EU and OECD levels, will be secured as quickly as possible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it