MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W96869817 · doi:10.20506/rst.26.2.1751

Armonización internacional de los requisitos reglamentarios

2007· article· es· W96869817 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marjorie Holmes, Rose Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Scientifique et Technique de l OIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthorizationPharmacovigilanceGuidelineEuropean unionBusinessPrincipal (computer security)Working groupTraceabilityAnimal healthMarketing authorizationPolitical scienceMedicineVeterinary medicineEngineeringComputer sciencePharmacologyLawInternational tradeComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products (VICH) was formed in April 1996 and is a programme of collaboration between regulatory authorities and the animal health industries of three world regions: the European Union, Japan and the United States of America. Two other regions, Canada and Australia/New Zealand, have observer status. The principal goal of VICH is to harmonise technical data requirements of participating regulatory authorities before granting marketing authorisation or registration. VICH has finalised six guidelines on the technical requirements for marketing authorisation/registration of biological products. These guidelines have been fully implemented in the regions. Three more technical guidelines are under development by two expert working groups. VICH has also finalised a guideline which specifically deals with pharmacovigilance and veterinary medicinal products, including biological products. A further four guidelines relating to pharmacovigilance are under development by an expert working group.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Scientifique et Technique de l OIESame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207