Avaliação da tipificação e classificação de ovos comercializados na cidade do Rio de Janeiro/RJ Brasil
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 objective of the present work was to verify the type and class contained in the labeling of the packaging of eggs commercialized in city of Rio de Janeiro comparatively with the norms established in the Brazilian Legislation. 46 dozens of white and red eggs had been evaluated to: eggs weight; integrity, cleanness and shell deformity; height of the air chamber, and; ovoscopy of albumen and egg yolk. Statistics was performed by simple descriptive analysis, observing it agreement or not with the current law. The results had shown that 10.9% were in agreement with legislation and 89.1% in disagreement. Of these (41 samples), 51.2% was aspects related to the omissions in labeling; 39.0% to the imperfections in the classification; 39.0% in disagreement with the presented type in the packing; 7.3% with the compromise of the integrity and cleanness of the shell, and; 7.3% had presented shell mildew formation. It can be concluded that be necessary attention by authorities in the egg's fiscalization since packing until its commercialization.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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