State of the modern system of biosecurity and biosecurity of Ukraine and proposals for its improvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article offers the author’s vision for the creation of a system of biological safety and biological protection of the state in Ukraine, which will consist of the following elements, namely: the Biosafety Management and Bioprotection Management Authority of Ukraine; Law of Ukraine on Biosafety and Biological Protection of the State; Strategy for ensuring biological safety and biological protection on the principle of «single health» for the period up to 2025 with the approved action plan for its implementation; Interdepartmental Commission on Biosafety Management and Biological Protection and Management of Hazardous Biological Agents, Products of Their Life and Processing; National Bank of Genetic Resources of Ukraine; Subjects of ensuring biological safety and biological protection of the state; Advisory body on a voluntary basis ‒ the Commission on Biosafety and Biosecurity under the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine. It is concluded that Ukraine does not currently have an effective system of biological safety and biological protection to counter biological threats to the national security of Ukraine. It is proposed to use the positive international experience in the formation of a comprehensive program of biological safety and biological protection (for example, Germany, Denmark, Canada) in Ukraine in developing an appropriate domestic program that will help combat threats to national security of Ukraine. Key words: system, elements, commission, biological threats, biological risks, biological safety, biological protection, legal support.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".