Special Welfare Concerns in Countries Dependent on Live Animal Trade: The Real Foreign Animal Disease Emergency for Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Any outbreak of an Office International des Epizooties trade-disrupting (previously List-A) disease, such as classical swine fever or foot and mouth disease in a previously disease-free region can have severe consequences for nonhuman animal welfare. In addition to animals destroyed for the purposes of disease eradication, certain preexisting trade patterns may result in welfare slaughter programs affecting many more animals than the disease eradication effort. Welfare slaughter is the destruction of healthy animals to prevent overcrowding on farms under movement restriction and as a consequence of loss of access to live animal export markets. Governments of European countries have anticipated welfare slaughter as part of their disease eradication preparedness. The concept of welfare slaughter and the resource implications thereof have not been included in current, published, livestock disease emergency-planning documents in Canada or the United States. Animal welfare, specifically the killing of healthy animals (not foreign animal disease eradication) has been the focus of public concern in recent disease-eradication efforts in Europe. North American organizations responsible for livestock exotic disease emergency preparedness need to expand their plans to include welfare slaughter.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".