MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304891822

Avis du 16 décembre 2016 révisé le 14 mars 2017 de l’Anses relatif à la contamination de produits de charcuterie crue par Trichinella spp.

2017· preprint· fr· W4304891822 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Villena, Jean-Christophe Augustin, Anne Brisabois, Frédéric Carlin, O. Cerf, Pierre Colin, Philippe Dantigny, Florence Dubois‐Brissonnet, Michel Fédérighi, Benoît Foligné, F. Richard-Forget, Philippe Fravalo, Pascal Garry, Michel Gautier, Laurent Guillier, Nathalie Jourdan‐Da Silva, Alexandre Leclercq, Simon Le Hello, Eric Oswald, Nicole Pavio, Sabine Schorr‐Galindo, Muriel Thomas, Marie-Bénédicte Peyrat, Nathalie Arnich, Moez Sanaa, Anne Thébault

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicParasitic Diseases Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citation suggérée : Anses. (2017). Avis du 16 décembre 2016 révisé le 14 mars 2017 de l’Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail relatif à la contamination de produits de charcuterie crue par Trichinella spp. (saisine n°2016-SA-0040). Maisons-Alfort : Anses, 34 p.Avis de l’Anses - Saisine n°2016-SA-0040 - "Cet avis annule et remplace l’avis du 16 décembre 2016. La recommandation relative à l’étiquetage p 27 « cuire suffisamment les charcuteries à base de foie de porc destinées à être consommées cuites » est modifiée comme suit : « De façon plus générale, les experts recommandent un étiquetage mentionnant : « cuire à cœur » pour les produits à base de porc destinés à être consommés cuits.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.020

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicParasitic Diseases Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207