MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1541513809 · doi:10.1108/00070700010362040

Genetically modified food issues

2000· article· en· W1541513809 on OpenAlexaff
Shane Morris, Catherine C. Adley

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Food Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrishGenetically modified foodPublic opinionPolitical scienceFood processingGenetically modified organismPublic relationsBiotechnologyLawBiologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetically modified (GM) food is currently being intensely debated in Ireland and throughout Europe. Academic scientists are important players in both the public discourse and in the public policy formulation process. This paper reveals and explores the perceptions and attitudes of Irish university based academic scientists to issues regarding GM food. Most notably, 79.1 per cent of respondents stated that there should be no immediate complete ban of all GM foods and their production. The majority of respondents (70.1 per cent) believed it unlikely that within the next 20 years a substantial reduction in world hunger would occur, due to developments within modern biotechnology. Important opinions and standpoints of Irish academic scientists, which the public, industry and policy makers often look to for informed opinion on matters of a scientific content, are discussed. Results also show that the Irish Science community representatives’ pro‐GM food stance at the National Public Consultation process was justified as it reflected the majority view among respondents.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Food JournalSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207