「화학물질관리법」과 「산업안전보건법」의 영업비밀 사전 허가 제도 도입과 관련한 쟁점 분석
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The major objectives of this study are to review the issues surrounding trade secret claims in the Chemicals Control Act and Amendment on Occupational Safety and Health Act(1917-227) and to propose a way of improving the reliability of chemical information in MSDSs, labels and National Chemical Survey results. Materials: To review the issues on trade secret claims, we made an analysis frame which was divided into three steps: Value and Problem Recognition; New Regulation Design; and Enforcement and Amendment. We then compared Korean issues with issues from the United States’ Hazard Communication Standard and Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act, Canada’s Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System and Hazardous Materials Information Review Act and the European Union’s Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of substances and Mixtures. Results: The stage of right-to-know development in Korea has passed the Value and Problem Recognition phase, so efforts are needed to elaborately design new regulation. Conclusions: We recommend two ways to improve right-to-know in Korea. First, strict examination of the quality of documents for trade secret claims is very important. Second, trade secrets should be limited to less-hazardous substances.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.010 |
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 it