MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W171157744

Implications of nanotechnology applications: using genetics as a lesson.

2002· article· en· W171157744 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanotechnologyNothingIntellectual propertyEngineering ethicsComputer scienceData scienceSociologyEngineeringEpistemologyPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I. Introduction As society becomes more comfortable discussing genetics and its related ethics, new technology is blossoming in the background. Nanotechnology may speak the same societal language as does genetics, in that both technological movements involve tiny science and large imagination. In way, it is natural--and almost inevitable--that the genetic revolution and the revolution be compared. Both fields involve smaller and smaller scales and manipulation of nano-sized materials. Both fields also create ricochet effects in almost every aspect of society. While is new, so new that nothing seems impossible, there are certain predictions that may be safely drawn. Though we need to be cautious of both positive and negative hype, some speculative applications of are becoming clear. Already today, scientists and engineers are creating nanowires and carbon nanotubes slated for super-strong, super-efficient and eventually super-cheap products. In nanomedicine, there are discussions of sending dendrimer polymers into every reach of the body to dispense drugs in specifically localized cells, and of dispatching diagnostic nano-machines into the body to detect cancer when only few cancerous cells exist. (1) Moreover, will be used as tool for genetic information and research, facilitating genome sequencing and nuclear transfer with smart nano-devices that have some independence and learning capabilities. For every possible application of nanotechnology--and even for fantastical ones--we need to examine social, ethical and legal implications. We can learn from the genetic revolution and ponder how similar issues might arise in nanotechnology. For instance, we can forecast privacy, intellectual property and concept of life concerns. Yet, at the same time, it is important to recognize that is its own creature as well. Because is more application than exploration, many societal concerns will reflect this difference from genetics. Like the World Wide Web, nanotechnology may appear gradually and yet have revolutionary effect. (2) The purpose of this paper is to provide cursory overview of some possible social, ethical and legal issues implicated in the development of nanotechnology. All issues within this paper evidently warrant further analysis. II. Social Implications Inherent in the promise of is the creation of superior products and services at much-reduced cost. The effect of such creation, by itself, will perhaps take decades to manifest in society, (3) spinning off into environmental, social, economic and educational implications. Within these spheres, as with genetics, we will find a fundamental tension of civilization -- the tension between humanity's quest for more control over nature and the future, and our equally strong desire for stability and predictability in the present. (4) a. Environmental implications One of the more common social notes that seems to arise from perusal of the literature is that will have positive effect on the environment. Nanotechnology promises to reduce by orders of magnitude the inputs of energy and materials and associated discharges required to produce device that can perform particular task. (5) Due to the near-perfect potential efficiency of nanotechnology, by-products will be minimized and emissions will be controlled. Roco and Bainbridge envision applications such as tires where the carbon black is replaced with an environmentally friendly nanotechnological substance. (6) Electricity will be generated with much less fuel and the environmental footprint of electricity will consequently be vastly smaller. (7) Filters for water or oil will be ultrafine, allowing fewer impurities and contaminants into the product, and gasoline consumption in turn will plummet. …

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.100 · 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