MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076652104 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0527

On Precautionary Policies

2006· article· en· W2076652104 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

VenueManagement Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRisk Perception and Management
Canadian institutionsCenter for Interuniversity Research and Analysis on OrganizationsPolytechnique MontréalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecautionary principleStatuteContext (archaeology)Risk analysis (engineering)UncertaintyBusinessResource (disambiguation)Law and economicsPublic economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the United States and most industrialized countries, regulatory policies pertaining to food safety, occupational health, and environmental protection are (according to laws and statutes) science based. The complexity of some ecosystems and new technologies, however, makes it increasingly necessary to deal with situations where scientists cannot yet provide a definite picture. In this context, a widely invoked (but debated) rule, known as the Precautionary Principle, says to address potential hazards right away with preventive measures. We develop an intuitive formalization of this rule, which allows us to infer what an appropriate precautionary policy should do. Implications for resource conservation and the regulation of technological risks are then explored.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.303 · 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