MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098589572

Traceability, Liability and Incentives for Food Safety and Quality

2008· article· en· W7098589572 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraceabilityFood safetyIncentiveLiabilityQuality (philosophy)NoticeProduct (mathematics)Food quality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. 1Traceability, Liability and Incentives for Food Safety and Quality Recent food safety concerns and well-publicized food scares have heightened awareness of traceability in the food supply chain. When the first U.S. case of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE or “mad cow disease”) was discovered in Washington State, federal authorities suggested that “it might take weeks, even months, to track the origins of the diseased cow ” (Clemetson and Simon, p.1). With the cooperation of herd owners, livestock dealers and market operators as well as detailed record searches between United States and Canadian agencies, the authorities were able to trace the origin of the affected cow to Canada only after a week, but herd mates were never fully traced. The December 2003 case of BSE in Washington State highlighted the demand for traceability to regain consumer confidence after the discovery of a first event. In addition, in the case of highly contagious disease or when multiple related dangers are suspected, traceability is important to reduce risk of further damage.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.133
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.133
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.015
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0080.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207