MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133279413

Évaluation des risques pour l’environnement et des risques indirects pour la santé humaine posés par les barbus puntigrus tetrazona glofishMD, starfire redMD, electric greenMD, sunburst orangeMD et galactic purpleMD : des poissons d’ornement transgéniques

2023· other· fr· W7133279413 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pêches et Océans Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2023
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDitchWestern europeQualitative analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conformément à la Loi canadienne sur la protection de l’environnement (LCPE), Spectrum Brands a présenté à Environnement et Changement climatique Canada (ECCC), au titre du Règlement sur les renseignements concernant les substances nouvelles (organismes) [RRSN(O)], quatre avis concernant des barbus Puntigrus tetrazona génétiquement modifiés : GloFishMD Electric GreenMD (GB2011), GloFishMD Starfire RedMD (RB2015), GloFishMD Sunburst OrangeMD (OB2019) et GloFishMD Galactic PurpleMD (PB2019). Des évaluations des risques pour l’environnement et des risques indirects pour la santé humaine ont été menées et comprenaient une analyse des dangers potentiels, des probabilités d’exposition et des incertitudes connexes afin de tirer des conclusions sur les risques et fournir un Avis scientifique à ECCC et à Santé Canada (SC) de manière à éclairer leur évaluation des risques aux termes de la LCPE. Les évaluations ont été comparées à celles des lignées de tétras, de poissons-zèbres et de combattants GloFishMD précédemment notifiées.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du CanadaFrench-language works237,207