MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318017370 · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2023.113632

Evaluation of the genotoxic potential of acrylamide: Arguments for the derivation of a tolerable daily intake (TDI value)

2023· review· en· W4318017370 on OpenAlexaff
Sabine Guth, Matthias Baum, Alexander T. Cartus, Patrick Diel, Karl‐Heinz Engel, Barbara Engeli, Bernd Epe, Tilman Grune, Dirk Haller, Volker Heinz, Michael Hellwig, Jan G. Hengstler, Thomas Henle, Hans‐Ulrich Humpf, Henry Jäger, Hans‐Georg Joost, Sabine E. Kulling, Dirk W. Lachenmeier, Alfonso Lampen, Marcel Leist, Angela Mally, Doris Marko, Ute Nöthlings, Elke Röhrdanz, Angelika Roth, Joachim Spranger, Richard H. Stadler, Pablo Steinberg, Stefan Vieths, Wim Wätjen, Gerhard Eisenbrand

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Chemical Toxicology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPotato Plant Research
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
FundersState Key Laboratory of MycologyDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsTolerable daily intakeAcrylamideValue (mathematics)ToxicologyEnvironmental healthMedicineChemistryBiologyBody weightMathematicsStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This opinion of the Senate Commission on Food Safety (SKLM) of the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) presents arguments for an updated risk assessment of diet-related exposure to acrylamide (AA), based on a critical review of scientific evidence relevant to low dose exposure. The SKLM arrives at the conclusion that as long as an appropriate exposure limit for AA is not exceeded, genotoxic effects resulting in carcinogenicity are unlikely to occur. Based on the totality of the evidence, the SKLM considers it scientifically justified to derive a tolerable daily intake (TDI) as a health-based guidance value.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood and Chemical ToxicologySame topicPotato Plant ResearchFrench-language works237,207