Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a widespread perception that the practice of importing untreated frozen fish for use as bait is a 'high risk' activity. The problem has been that there has been no quantifiable data on which to evaluate that perception. In 1997 the Western Australian Rock Lobster Industry commissioned a quantitative risk assessment, based on OIE principles, to assess the risk posed by bait in rock lobster pots. Several novel approaches were used to quantitatively assess the risk, based on historical patterns of usage. The resulting conclusion was that the risk of introducing disease with rock lobster bait was extremely low, or did not exist at all. \n \nIn 1998 the WTO ruled on the Canadian dispute with Australia over salmon. In the Report of the Appellate Body, the definition of risk assessment was explored in detail. Their rulings indicate that risk assessments should be based on a threefold test: Identification of the diseases; evaluation of the likelihood of entry; and evaluation of the effect of SPS measures which might be applied to reduce risk. These were all met in the 1997 report. However, there are serious questions about disease identification in the absence of data and the meaning of "appropriate level of risk". These issues still need to be addressed by the international community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".