Proposals for improving the methodic and regulatory framework of the Russian Federation in the field of chemical safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. In accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of March 11, 2019 No. 97 “On the basis of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the field of chemical and biological safety” until 2025 and beyond” the priority areas include monitoring chemical and biological risks, improving regulatory framework and public administration. In terms of improving legal regulation and public administration, development and application of documents that provide mandatory requirements for chemical products in the Russian Federation are among the priorities. Material and methods. The regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, EEC and the EU (in particular, Decrees, Resolutions, Technical Regulations, Directives, Regulations, etc. in the field of safe management of substances of concern), as well as domestic and international databases, scientific articles and monographs containing information on the toxic properties of chemicals are used as materials. The methodology of the work consisted in a comparative analysis of approaches to the regulation of highly hazardous chemicals by international organizations, the Russian Federation, the European Union and its states, the USA, Canada. Results and discussions. The article presents the main provisions of the concept for the replacement of highly hazardous chemicals in products with safe analogues; scientifically substantiated national list of chemicals of concern, containing 1480 items, including 630 mutagens, 320 carcinogens, 271 reprotoxicants, 502 endocrine disruptors; criteria for classifying substances as candidates for prohibition and (or) restriction. The proposals for amending the methodological and regulatory framework of the Russian Federation in the field of chemical safety are formulated. Conclusion. In order to develop effective measures to minimize the risk of exposure to chemicals and safe management, including prohibition and (or) restriction, it is advisable: introduction of a national list of chemicals of concern into the methodological and regulatory framework of the Russian Federation and the Eurasian Economic Union; creation of state monitoring of highly hazardous chemicals in products at all stages of the life cycle from raw materials to production and consumption waste with the direct involvement of manufacturers; formation and maintenance of the register of emissions and discharges; coding of waste according to hazardous properties (carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, reprotoxicity, impact on the endocrine system) and its inclusion as a classification feature in the Federal Classification Catalog of Waste; search and evaluation of alternatives for highly hazardous chemicals.
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 | 0.109 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".