A praxis for ethical research and scientific conduct in Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last 30 years have seen remarkable changes in the political and social structure of Greenland. In 1979 Home Rule was proclaimed, giving the territory some measure of autonomy from Denmark. Self-Government ( Naalakkersuisut ) was instituted in June 2009 after a referendum, giving Greenland control over all areas of governance except foreign affairs and defence, which remain under Danish control. At present neither the Self-Government authorities nor any research body in Greenland has formulated a comprehensive code of ethics or guidelines for ethical and responsible conduct of research. In this paper we discuss the hazards of this legal vacuum and propose possible opportunities for moving forward. We consider the development of such codes to be integral to the development of science policy by the Self-Government authorities and an important tool for scientific engagement with the international community at a time when Greenland is making important decisions about resource development and sustainability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.150 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.206 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.025 | 0.033 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".