Skip to main content
The Food Additives platform maintains data quality through automated testing, exception monitoring, and systematic classification of the source regulatory standard.

​
Data Source

All regulatory data comes from a single authoritative source: the Codex Alimentarius General Standard for Food Additives (CXS 192-1995), published by the joint FAO/WHO food standards body.

Key Facts

  • No PII: The platform contains no personally identifiable information — all data is public regulatory text
  • Single source of truth: One authoritative standard, not aggregated from multiple unofficial sources
  • Structured extraction: The 530-page PDF standard is systematically extracted and parsed into structured data
  • Annual refresh cadence: Data is refreshed when Codex publishes updates (typically annually)

​
Automated Quality Checks

The platform runs automated tests on every data refresh. These tests verify:
If any automated check fails, the data refresh is blocked until the issue is resolved. Data is never published in an inconsistent state.

​
Exception Monitoring

Beyond automated tests, the platform monitors exceptions — data that is valid but unusual and may need investigation:
  • Unrecognized limit formats: Usage limits that couldn’t be automatically classified are flagged for manual review
  • Conflicting signals: Ingredients that are both specifically permitted AND on the GMP exclusion list for a category are marked as “Conditional”
  • Heavily conditional rules: Rules with 3+ regulatory conditions are flagged as requiring expert review

​
Condition Classification

All 834 regulatory conditions from the Codex standard are classified by type: Coverage: 99.3% of all conditions are classified into a meaningful type.

​
Ingredient Name Normalization

INS numbers from the Codex standard are mapped to standardized ingredient names. Known data quality corrections include:
  • Shifted alignments in the source PDF (INS numbers mapped to wrong names) — 20 corrections applied
  • Truncated names from PDF extraction errors — restored to full names
  • Consistent formatting — all names normalized to Title Case for readability
Result: 306 INS numbers map to 306 distinct, correctly named ingredients.

​
How to Report Data Issues

If you notice data that appears incorrect — an ingredient that seems to be in the wrong category, a limit that doesn’t match the published standard, or any other discrepancy — please contact support@terces.io with:
  1. The ingredient name and INS number
  2. The food category in question
  3. What you believe the correct value should be
  4. A reference to the Codex standard section (if available)
We investigate all reported issues and apply corrections in the next data refresh.