MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967912748 · doi:10.1387/ijdb.103281mm

The biopolitics of frozen embryos

2011· article· en· W1967912748 on OpenAlexaff
Manuela Monti, Carlo Alberto Redi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Developmental Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Pavia
KeywordsBiologyBiopowerIdeologyReproductionEpistemologyAcknowledgementBioethicsEnvironmental ethicsSociologyEngineering ethicsLawGeneticsComputer sciencePolitical sciencePoliticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unresolved debate about frozen embryos has left open the discussion on "what to do with them". There are only three ways to deal with frozen embryos: 1) to leave them frozen indefinitely; 2) to defrost and discard them and 3) to use them for research. In this paper, we suggest that the application of current scientific knowledge, instead of inappropriately referring to ethical principles or to the concept of person, could help with the decision about what to do with hundreds of thousands of frozen embryos, thus bringing the sensitive debate on bioethical issues to shared practical solutions. We face a new individual only when a new functional copy of his genome is formed. In both natural and artificial animal and plant reproduction, this principle applies. This status occurs in humans at the 4-8 cell stage. Acknowledgement of this factual datum would allow advocates of all religious and ideological beliefs to defend their principles and to realign their positions to a setting within the boundaries of current scientific knowledge.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Developmental BiologySame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207