MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401124985 · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8892

Commodity risk assessment of maple veneer sheets from Canada

2024· article· en· W4401124985 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEFSA Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsVeneerEuropean unionQuarantineXylella fastidiosaMaterials scienceEnvironmental sciencePulp and paper industryComposite materialHorticultureBusinessBiologyEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to deliver a risk assessment on the likelihood of pest freedom from Union quarantine pests and pests subject to measures adopted pursuant to Article 30 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/2031 for the maple veneer sheets manufactured according to the process set out by Canada, with emphasis on the freedom from Davidsoniella virescens and Phytophthora ramorum (non‐EU isolates). The assessment was conducted for veneer sheets of up to 0.7 mm and up to 6 mm thickness, taking into account the different phases in the veneer production in a systems approach. Some of those phases, taken alone, including the heat treatment of logs in a water bath, the cutting into thin veneer sheets and the final high heat drying of veneer sheets are expected to be effective against some of the pests, without uncertainties, making the system approach fully effective. The panel considers that no insects would survive cutting of logs into thin veneer sheets of 0.7 mm and that Xylella fastidiosa will not survive the temperatures in the water bath and final drying of veneers. The degree of pest freedom for the different groups of organisms is generally very high with slightly lower degree of pest freedom for veneer sheets of 6 mm thickness because of lower temperatures reached in the final drying of veneer sheets compared to thinner sheets. P. ramorum is not expected to survive the high heat drying of thin veneer sheets, but it may survive the lower temperatures inside thicker veneer sheets. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE) indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9989 and 10,000 veneer sheets (thickness 6 mm) per 10,000 will be free from living P. ramorum. For D. virescens, the EKE indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9984 and 10,000 veneer sheets (0.7 mm) per 10,000 and that between 9954 and 10,000 veneer sheets (6 mm) per 10,000 will be free from living inoculum. For other relevant groups of pests, the greatest likelihood of pest presence was observed for wood decay fungi. The EKE indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9967 and 10,000 veneer sheets (0.7 mm) per 10,000 and that between 9911 and 10,000 veneer sheets (6 mm) per 10,000 will be free from living wood decay fungi.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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