MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1600247237 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.45733

Labelling Policy for GM Foods: Pragmatism in Action or Policy Failure?

2003· article· en· W1600247237 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michele M. Veeman

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLabellingAction (physics)Food labellingPublic economicsBusinessFood labelingFood productsAgriculturePublic policyPolitical scienceBiotechnologyEconomicsFood scienceBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public wariness of genetically modified (GM) foods has led many nations to develop labelling policies for foods derived from modern agricultural biotechnology. In most cases mandatory labelling has been specified. In contrast, voluntary labelling is the chosen policy approach for the United States and Canada. Detailed regulations to enable a voluntary labelling policy to become effective in Canada have been time-consuming to develop. An even longer period of time has applied in the case of unsuccessful efforts to develop consensus standards for GM food labelling at the international level, through the processes of Codex Alimentarius.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207