A review of Canadian and international food safety systems: Issues and recommendations for the future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In January 2019, the Safe Food for Canadians Act/Safe Food for Canadians regulations (heretofore identified as SFCR) came into force across Canada and brought a more streamlined process to food safety practice in Canada. Food trade and production processes have evolved rapidly in recent decades, as Canada imports and exports food products; therefore it is critically important to remain aware of the latest advances responding to a range of challenges and opportunities in the food safety value chain. Looking through the optics of the recent SFCR framework, this paper places the spotlight on leading domestic and international research and practices to help strengthen food safety policies of the future. By shedding some light on new research, we also draw attention to international developments that are noteworthy, and place those in context as to how new Canadian food safety policy and regulation can be further advanced. The paper will benchmark Canada through a review study of food safety best practices by juxtaposing (i) stated aspirations with, (ii) actual performance in leading Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) jurisdictions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".