New Scientific Paradigms for Probiotics and Prebiotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inaugural meeting of the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) was held May 3 to May 5 2002 in London, Ontario, Canada. A group of 63 academic and industrial scientists from around the world convened to discuss current issues in the science of probiotics and prebiotics. ISAPP is a non-profit organization comprised of international scientists whose intent is to strongly support and improve the levels of scientific integrity and due diligence associated with the study, use, and application of probiotics and prebiotics. In addition, ISAPP values its role in facilitating communication with the public and healthcare providers and among scientists in related fields on all topics pertinent to probiotics and prebiotics. It is anticipated that such efforts will lead to development of approaches and products that are optimally designed for the improvement of human and animal health and well being. This article is a summary of the discussions, conclusions, and recommendations made by 8 working groups convened during the first ISAPP workshop focusing on the topics of: definitions, intestinal flora, extra-intestinal sites, immune function, intestinal disease, cancer, genetics and genomics, and second generation prebiotics.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| 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 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".