Reasoned opinion on the modification of the existing MRLs for ametoctradin in various commodities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, The Netherlands, hereafter referred to as the evaluating Member State (EMS), received an application from the company BASF SE to modify the existing MRL for the active substance ametoctradin in leek and to set import tolerances for ametoctradin in potatoes, tropical root and tuber vegetables, onions, garlic, shallots, spring onions, aubergines, okra, gherkins, courgettes, cucurbits (inedible peel), broccoli, head cabbage, Chinese cabbage, scarole, cress, land cress, rucola/rocket, red mustard, leaves and sprouts of Brassica spp., spinach, beet leaves, purslane, celery, fennel, and hops. In order to accommodate the intended use of ametoctradin on leek in the Netherlands, and in order to accommodate the authorized uses in the United States and Canada on other crops under consideration, the EMS proposed to raise the existing MRLs in all crops (and also in lettuce), except in tomatoes and peppers. The EMS drafted two evaluation reports in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, which were submitted to the European Commission and forwarded to EFSA. The submitted residue data are sufficient to derive the MRL proposals and to support the proposed residue data extrapolations for all the crops under consideration, except for spring onion. The submitted residue data indicated no need to modify the existing EU MRLs for tomatoes and peppers. Adequate analytical enforcement methods are available to control residues of ametoctradin in the commodities under consideration at the validated LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg. EFSA concludes that the uses of ametoctradin on the crops under consideration will not result in a consumer exposure exceeding the toxicological reference value and therefore will not pose a public health concern.
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 | 0.031 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.059 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
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".