MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387580169 · doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2023.105516

Quantitative Structure Use Relationships: Highlights from a technical summit meeting

2023· article· en· W4387580169 on OpenAlexaff
Rosemary Zaleski, Andreas Ahrens, Jon A. Arnot, Richard A. Becker, Mark Bonnell, Sean P. Collins, Paul C. DeLeo, Peter Egeghy, Michelle R. Embry, Todd Gouin, Kristin Isaacs, Elke Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueRegulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicChemistry and Chemical Engineering
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaHealth CanadaARC Resources (Canada)
FundersAmerican Chemistry Council
KeywordsSummitRisk assessmentFunction (biology)Government (linguistics)Computer scienceConfidentialityProduct (mathematics)Process (computing)Construct (python library)Knowledge managementData scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Management scienceBusinessEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Quantitative Structure Use Relationship (QSUR) Summit, held on November 2-4, 2022, focused on advancing the development, refinement, and use of QSURs to support chemical substance prioritization and risk assessment and mitigation. QSURs utilize chemical structures to predict the function of a chemical within a formulated product or an industrial process. This presumed function can then be used to develop chemical use categories or other information necessary to refine exposure assessments. The invited expert meeting was attended by 38 scientists from Canada, Finland, France, the UK, and the USA, representing government, business, and academia, with expertise in exposure science, chemical engineering, risk assessment, formulation chemistry, and machine learning. Workshop discussions emphasized the importance of collection and sharing of data and quantification of relative chemical quantities to progress QSUR development. Participants proposed collaborative approaches to address key challenges, including mechanisms for aggregating information while still protecting proprietary product composition and other confidential business information. Discussions also led to proposals for applications beyond exposure and risk modeling, including sustainable formulation discovery. In addition, discussions continue to construct, conduct, and circulate case studies tied to various specific problem formulations in which QSURs supply or derive information on chemical functions, concentrations, and exposures.

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRegulatory Toxicology and PharmacologySame topicChemistry and Chemical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207