MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980272132 · doi:10.1002/em.22338

Mutation as a Toxicological Endpoint for Regulatory Decision‐Making

2019· article· en· W2980272132 on OpenAlexaff
Robert H. Heflich, George E. Johnson, Andreas Zeller, Francesco Marchetti, George R. Douglas, Kristine L. Witt, B. Bhaskar Gollapudi, Paul A. White

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental and Molecular Mutagenesis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutagenGermline mutationMutationSomatic cellPoint mutationBiologyRisk assessmentGeneticsComputational biologyToxicologyCarcinogenBioinformaticsGeneComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutations induced in somatic cells and germ cells are responsible for a variety of human diseases, and mutation per se has been considered an adverse health concern since the early part of the 20th Century. Although in vitro and in vivo somatic cell mutation data are most commonly used by regulatory agencies for hazard identification, that is, determining whether or not a substance is a potential mutagen and carcinogen, quantitative mutagenicity dose-response data are being used increasingly for risk assessments. Efforts are currently underway to both improve the measurement of mutations and to refine the computational methods used for evaluating mutation data. We recommend continuing the development of these approaches with the objective of establishing consensus regarding the value of including the quantitative analysis of mutation per se as a required endpoint for comprehensive assessments of toxicological risk. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 61:34-41, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.125
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.080
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1250.080
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations70
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental and Molecular MutagenesisSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207