Glossary of terms used in developmental and reproductive toxicology (IUPAC Recommendations 2016)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The primary objective of this glossary is to give clear definitions for those who contribute to studies relevant to these disciplines, or who must interpret them, but are not themselves reproductive physiologists or physicians. This applies especially to chemists who need to understand the literature of reproductive and teratogenic effects of substances without recourse to a multiplicity of other glossaries or dictionaries. The glossary includes terms related to basic and clinical reproductive biology and teratogenesis, insofar as they are necessary for a self-contained document, particularly terms related to diagnosing, measuring, and understanding the effects of substances on the embryo, the fetus, and on the male and female reproductive systems. The glossary consists of about 1200 primary alphabetical entries and includes Annexes of common abbreviations and examples of chemicals with known effects on human reproduction and development. The authors hope that toxicologists, pharmacologists, medical practitioners, risk assessors, and regulatory authorities are among the groups who will find this glossary helpful, in addition to chemists. In particular, the glossary should facilitate the worldwide use of chemical terminology in relation to occupational and environmental risk assessment.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.096 |
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".