MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1503507277 · doi:10.1186/1472-6939-2-2

Clinical ethics revisited: responses

2001· letter· en· W1503507277 on OpenAlexaff
Solomon R. Benatar, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Abdallah S. Daar, Tony Hope, Sue MacRae, Laura Weiss Roberts, Virginia A. Sharpe

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Ethics · 2001
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPhilosophy of medicinePhilosophyEpistemologyMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This series of responses was commissioned to accompany the article by Singer et al, which can be found at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6939/2/1 . If you would like to comment on the article by Singer et al or any of the responses, please email us on editorial@biomedcentral.com .

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)0.315
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.968
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3150.968
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.1100.588
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.014

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 head0.506
GPT teacher head0.643
Teacher spread0.137 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreCommentary

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

Citations15
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical EthicsSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207