Proposed criteria for identifying GE crop plants that pose a low or negligible risk to the environment under conditions of low-level presence in seed
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
The low-level presence (LLP) of genetically engineered (GE) seeds that have been approved in the country of origin but not the country of import presents challenges for regulators in both seed importing and exporting countries, as well as for the international seed trade and the farmers who rely on it. In addition to legal, financial and regulatory challenges, such LLP situations in seed may also require an environmental risk assessment by the country of import. Such assessments have typically been informed by the national framework established to support decisions related to wide scale cultivation, and frequently do not take into account the low environmental exposure and prior regulatory history of the GE plant. In addition, such assessment processes may not be well suited to the decision-making timeframe that is necessary when dealing with an LLP situation in imported seed. In order to facilitate regulatory decision making, this paper proposes a set of scientific criteria for identifying GE crop plants that are expected to pose a low or negligible risk to the environment under LLP conditions in seed. Regulatory decision makers in some importing countries may decide to use these criteria to assist in risk analysis associated with LLP situations they are experiencing or could experience in the future, and might choose to proactively apply the criteria to identify existing GE plants with regulatory approvals in other countries that would be expected to pose low risk under conditions of LLP in seed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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