MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299789489

Análisis de peligro y puntos críticos de control: Su relación con la inocuidad de los alimentos Hazard analysis and critical control points. Its relation with food inocuity

2004· article· es· W4299789489 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elvira Olivé González, Cecilia Vázquez López, Miriam Valdés Fernández, Betty Castro Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2004
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Safety and Hygiene
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Se hace una revisión bibliográfica del sistema de análisis de peligro y puntos críticos de control (APPCC) teniendo en cuenta sus antecedentes históricos, así como la descripción del sistema (aplicable a cualquier eslabón de la cadena alimentaria), basado en la secuencia lógica y en la aplicación del árbol de decisiones para determinar los puntos críticos de control (PCC). Se hace referencia a su importancia como, por ejemplo, que detecta cualquier alteración desde el punto de vista biológico, físico y/o químico sin tener que esperar el producto final. Se mencionan inconvenientes tales como contar con personal capacitado, recursos, etcétera. Una de las razones básicas para la implantación del sistema es que se obtiene un alimento apto para el consumo humano. De los beneficios más importantes se puede citar que se reducen las reclamaciones y devoluciones. En este momento está implantado en países como Estados Unidos, Canadá, la Unión Europea y otros. A bibliographic review of the system of analysis of danger and critical control points (ADCCP) is made taking into account its historical background, as well as the description of the system (applicable to any link of the food chain), based on the logical sequence and on the application of the tree of decisions to determine the critical control points (CCP). Reference is made to its importance, as for example, that it detects any alteration from the biological, physical and/or chemical point of view without having to wait for the final product. Inconveniences, such as having to have a trained personnel, resources, etc. are mentioned. One of the basic reasons for the introduction of the system is the obtention of food apt to human consumption. The reduction of claims and devolutions are among the most important benefits. It has already been implemented in the United States, Canada, the European Union, and others.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicFood Safety and HygieneFrench-language works237,207