Regulation in a Brave New World: Safeguarding Against Subversive Threats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biotechnology is a rapidly advancing science that has the potential to revolutionize medicine and transform human abilities. Accompanying these positives are an underdiscussed category of threats to principles of human rights and equality. Although any technology might be used to inegalitarian ends, biotechnology has the capacity to beget inequality with a genetic basis. Global regulation is needed to safeguard against the subversion of human rights. However, the intangible nature of the risk combined with the medical possibilities of biotechnology present a significant challenge to achieving international consensus on issues of regulation. An inclusive dialogue that builds on the precedent of current global cooperation initiatives is needed to overcome these challenges. Policies need to be based on a comprehensive consideration of biotechnology’s potential impacts. Evaluating whether the proliferation and integration of a technology is desirable for society is more profitable than assessing the technology’s inherent practical or moral value.
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 | 0.032 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".