MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063273303 · doi:10.1104/pp.112.209817

Editor’s Choice: Evaluating the Potential for Adverse Interactions within Genetically Engineered Breeding Stacks

2013· editorial· en· W2063273303 on OpenAlex
Henry‐York Steiner, Claire Halpin, Joseph M. Jez, John Kough, Wayne A. Parrott, Lynne Underhill, Natalie Weber, L. Curtis Hannah

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2013
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetically engineeredHybridBiologyGenetically modified organismBiotechnologyPlant breedingGenetically modified cropsSelection (genetic algorithm)Selective breedingEvolutionary biologyGeneticsTransgeneComputer scienceAgronomyGeneArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When genetically engineered stacks (also known as stacked or combined events) are produced by combining two or more single transgenic events by conventional breeding, the potential for interactions between the products of the events that impact food and feed safety can be evaluated and the need for further safety assessment can be determined on a case-by-case basis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.269 · 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