MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142204399 · doi:10.1080/00207230902757321

Environmental consequences of dioxin from the war in Vietnam: what has been done and what else could be done?

2009· article· en· W2142204399 on OpenAlex
Trien T. Nguyen

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

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgent OrangeVietnam WarEnvironmental protectionWorld War IIGeographyPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsEconomicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the climax of the war in Vietnam, about 77 million litres of defoliants (Agent Orange herbicide) contaminated with the highly toxic class of chlorinated dioxin chemicals was sprayed over approximately one‐fifth of the total land area of South Vietnam. For various reasons, the environmental impacts of this massive toxic contamination remained largely unknown and neglected for almost four decades. This paper reviews the slow progress in dealing with this war legacy in the light of other significant advances Vietnam has made on the post‐war development front. Suggested solutions for a long‐term interdisciplinary Comprehensive National Policy on Dioxin (CNPD) based on the concepts of common property, international cooperation, and economic equity are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.244 · 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