The ICLAS/CCAC International Symposium on Regulatory Testing and Animal Welfare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first International Symposium on Regulatory Testing and Animal Welfare (ISRTAW), held 21-23 June 2001, in Quebec City, Canada, brought together 160 experts from 22 countries from North and South America, Europe and Asia. The experts included representatives from national research and regulatory agencies, universities, and industry involved in chemicals, pesticides and drug safety testing. Representatives from European, Canadian and US animal welfare groups also participated in the discussions. The Symposium was organised by the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) and the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), with the support and assistance of many sponsors and advisors. ICLAS is a worldwide organisation whose purpose is to foster the international harmonisation of animal care and use practices. CCAC is the national agency responsible for overseeing the ethical use of animals in Canadian science. Both organisations are committed to fostering an environment in which global efforts to harmonise testing procedures using animals in a more-humane manner can be realised.
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 | 0.066 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".