A decade of RCPAQAP Biosecurity improving testing for biological threats in Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biosecurity is a term broadly applied to the protection, control and accountability of biological agents and toxins to minimise the risk of their introduction through natural, unintentional (accidents) or deliberate processes. Biosecurity protection involves the engagement of all stakeholders including government, public health networks, industry, and scientific community. While the Commonwealth Government primarily manages biosecurity, it is also a shared responsibility with State and Territory governments. Rapid, accurate diagnosis is essential to informing all levels of response to biosecurity threats. External quality assurance (EQA) through proficiency testing (PT) is an indispensable tool to allow assessment of laboratory performance. This ensures laboratory capability and capacity are in a constant state of readiness to effectively detect biological threats and reduce the impact and transmission of disease. Since 2009, the Royal College of Pathologists Australasia Quality Assurance Program (RCPAQAP) has been contracted by the Australian Government Department of Health to establish a proficiency testing program (PTP) for the detection of biological threat agents. Starting out as a PTP for the detection of Bacillus anthracis, RCPAQAP Biosecurity has undergone significant transformation, thereby building and enhancing laboratory preparedness. Alterations in the program have been in line with the changing landscape of biosecurity and other emerging infectious diseases across Australia, and worldwide.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".