MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802762047 · doi:10.6027/tn2017-573

PFAS in Paper and Board for Food Contact

2018· book· en· W2802762047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Trier, Camilla Taxvig, Anna Kjerstine Rosenmai, Gitte Alsing Pedersen

Bibliographic record

VenueTemaNord · 2018
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNordisk Ministerråd
KeywordsBusinessFood contact materialsOn boardComputer scienceFood scienceGeographyFood packagingBiologyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poly- and perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) are used in paper and board food contact materials (FCMs) and they have been found to be highly persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic. The purpose of the Nordic workshop and of this report is to:* create an overview of the use of PFAS in FCMs of paper and board and of the toxicity and migration into food of the various substances* provide an overview of whether appropriate risk assessments for fluorinated substances exist as a basis for specific regulations or recommendations* provide an overview of whether analytical methods suitable for analysing and regulating the substances are available* discuss the possibility and structure of national regulations or Nordic recommendations for PFAS in FCMs of paper and board. Risk management to reduce the total content of organically bound fluorine in paper and board FCMs is supported. The given report is published in continuation of a Nordic workshop on January 28th -29th 2015 on poly- and perfluorinated substances (PFAS) in food contact materials. Representatives from EU MS countries, US FDA, Canada and China, as well as manufacturers, retailers, compliance testing laboratories and academia were present in the workshop and contributed to the report.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.032

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations47
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTemaNordSame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207