PERSPECTIVES<br>European consumers and GM-foods<br>A lecture presented at a session organised by the Biotechnology Committeeof the Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, 26 April, 2012
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
Rather than ask consumers via questionnaires and polls about their attitudes to GM-foods and if they would buy<br /> them, the CONSUMERCHOICE study sought to determine whether European consumers actually did purchase<br /> GM-labelled food products in those countries participating in the project in which they were on sale (the Czech<br /> Republic, Poland, Spain and The Netherlands in this inquiry). The results showed (a) that indeed they did, and<br /> (b) that what consumers said in questionnaires with respect to GM-foods was not a reliable guide to what they<br /> did when buying their food supplies. A survey of the behaviour of Polish and UK citizens living in or visiting North<br /> America revealed that they took little or no action to avoid the widespread use of (unlabelled) GM-products in<br /> Canada and the United States.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it