MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366351813 · doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfad039

The need for good practice in the application of mechanistic constructs in hazard and risk assessment

2023· article· en· W4366351813 on OpenAlexaff
M.E. Meek, Daniele Wikoff

Bibliographic record

VenueToxicological Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverse Outcome PathwayHazardOutcome (game theory)Key (lock)Risk assessmentComputer scienceHazard analysisRisk analysis (engineering)Management scienceMedicineEngineeringComputational biologyBiologyComputer securityEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of recent and proposed workshops address the interface between key characteristics and mechanistic pathway descriptions (adverse outcome pathways and mode of action) to identify commonalities and potential for complementary application. Informed by different communities, these constructs have collective potential to increase confidence to support the application of mechanistic data in hazard assessment. This forum article summarizes concepts, introduces evolving understanding, and invites future collaboration to contribute to better common understanding and development of good practice in the use of mechanistic data in hazard assessment.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.353 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxicological SciencesSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207