Summary of the <i>Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As described by Environment and Climate Change Canada,[1] the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012 developed under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 are “a multi‐substance risk management instrument used to prohibit the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale or import of certain toxic substances and products containing these substances with a (limited) number of exemptions.” The substances currently prohibited by these regulations have been declared toxic to the environment and/or human health; are generally persistent, bioaccumulative, and/or inherently toxic as per the Act; and tend to be used in industrial applications. The Regulations are amended from time to time to add substances for which prohibition has been deemed appropriate, or to amend existing controls when necessary. Compliance with the requirements of the Regulations is mandatory and the provisions apply to every person or company in Canada, unless otherwise noted. This article summarizes the prohibitions, exemptions, and key features of the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012, including permitting provisions, reporting and record‐keeping, as well as considerations for compliance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.016 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".