MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2295574038 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b00864

Response to Comment on “Application of the Activity Framework for Assessing Aquatic Ecotoxicology Data for Organic Chemicals”

2016· letter· en· W2295574038 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul Thomas, Donald Mackay, Philipp Mayer, Jon A. Arnot, Malyka Galay Burgos

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsARC Resources (Canada)Trent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary sciencePhoneEcotoxicologyCitationEngineeringComputer scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVCorrespondence/Rebut...Correspondence/RebuttalNEXTResponse to Comment on "Application of the Activity Framework for Assessing Aquatic Ecotoxicology Data for Organic Chemicals"Paul Thomas†, Donald Mackay‡, Philipp Mayer§, Jon Arnot∥, and Malyka Galay Burgos*⊥View Author Information† CEHTRA/KREATiS, ZAC de Saint Hubert, 23 rue du Creuzat, 38080 L'Isle d'Abeau, France‡ Trent University, 1600 West Bank Drive, Peterborough, Ontario K9J 7B8, Canada§ Technical University of Denmark, Department of Environmental Engineering, Lyngby, Denmark∥ ARC Arnot Research & Consulting Inc, 36 Sproat Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M4M 1W4, Canada⊥ European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC), Avenue E. Van Nieuwenhuyse 2, B-1160 Brussels, Belgium*Phone: +32 2−663 3812; e-mail: [email protected]Cite this: Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 7, 4141–4142Publication Date (Web):March 8, 2016Publication History Published online8 March 2016Published inissue 5 April 2016https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.6b00864https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b00864article-commentaryACS PublicationsCopyright © 2016 American Chemical Society. This publication is available under these Terms of Use. Request reuse permissions This publication is free to access through this site. Learn MoreArticle Views596Altmetric-Citations3LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail PDF (148 KB) Get e-AlertscloseSUBJECTS:Membranes,Partition coefficient,Testing and assessment,Toxicity Get e-Alerts

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0220.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2210.207

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology→French-language works237,207→