Limites máximos de resíduos e suas implicações no comércio internacional de frutas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Embora, o Codex Alimentarius estabeleca padroes para os limites maximos de residuos (LMR), outros paises adotam suas proprias referencias, podendo gerar dificuldades na comercializacao internacional de alimentos e tornar-se barreiras sanitarias. Este trabalho tem como objetivo comparar os LMR estabelecidos pelo Codex, pelo Brasil e por paises importadores (Estados Unidos Uniao Europeia e Canada) para algumas frutas produzidas no Brasil, e verificar a possibilidade de seu uso como restricao ao comercio. Os dados utilizados na analise compreendem a ingestao diaria aceitavel (IDA) e LMR do Codex Alimentarius (FAO), do Departamento de Agricultura dos Estados Unidos (Usda), da Agencia Nacional de Vigilância Sanitaria (Anvisa) e as notificacoes desses paises junto ao Comite do Acordo sobre Medidas Sanitarias e Fitossanitarias (SPS). Os resultados mostram que o Codex nao divulga limites para a maioria dos pesticidas utilizados nas culturas analisadas. Adicionalmente, e preocupante que produtos toxicologicas de alto risco aplicados na producao dessas frutas, ainda nao tem definidos os LMR no Codex.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".