MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1817827583

What is animal welfare? Common definitions and their practical consequences.

2003· article· en· W1817827583 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline J Hewson

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal welfareAffect (linguistics)WelfarePositive economicsPublic economicsEnvironmental ethicsLaw and economicsPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceEconomicsLawPhilosophyBiologyEcologyCommunication
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In concluding my first article, I proposed that “...whatever we decide (about animal welfare) as a profession or as individuals, we must be knowledgeable” (1). In this and succeeding articles, some fundamental points will be covered, starting with what animal welfare is and how definitions affect the way animals are treated.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.071
Scholarly communication0.0100.023
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations158
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207