MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061738079 · doi:10.3917/re.071.0068

« REACH : encore un effort ! »

2013· article· fr· W2061738079 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie Fleckenstein, Christian Schaible

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales des Mines - Responsabilité et environnement · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicChemistry and Chemical Engineering
Canadian institutionsGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alors que les maladies chroniques et les contaminations de l’environnement explosent à travers le monde notamment en Europe, REACH peut être le bon outil pour réguler l’utilisation des substances chimiques. Cependant, même si ce dispositif comporte d’importantes avancées, nombre de lacunes et de retards dans sa mise en œuvre demeurent. Alors, encore un effort pour faire de REACH un outil efficace de lutte contre la pollution chimique et l’un des moteurs de l’innovation durable !

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0140.025
Open science0.0030.016
Research integrity0.0110.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.025

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales des Mines - Responsabilité et environnementSame topicChemistry and Chemical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207