MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025413964

Achieving humane outcomes in killing livestock by free bullet II: Target selection.

2019· article· en· W3025413964 on OpenAlexaff
Dennis Will, Terry L Whiting

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Ocular and Foreign Body Injuries
Canadian institutionsResearch Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal welfareLivestockBusinessMedicineBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Killing infected or surplus-to-market livestock by free bullet is unavoidable in Foreign Animal Disease response in countries exporting large numbers of live animals. Correct targeting and placement of free bullet projectiles result in immediate death, thereby making this method acceptable for humane animal killing. Regulatory veterinarians will be responsible for animal welfare in overseeing emergency killing of livestock by free bullet. To assure humane fatal penetrating brain injury under field conditions, veterinarians as operational experts, need to fully understand the anatomy of all farmed animals and the pathophysiology of the terminal ballistics of weapon systems to make appropriate, on the ground decisions, in emergency situations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicTraumatic Ocular and Foreign Body InjuriesFrench-language works237,207