MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078424334 · doi:10.1080/15265161003754072

In Pursuit of “Informed Hope” in the Stem Cell Discourse

2010· letter· en· W2078424334 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne Chekryn Reimer, Emily Borgelt, Judy Illes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Bioethics · 2010
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsNeuroDevNetUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioethicsStem cellSociologyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsLawPhilosophyBiologyGeneticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"In Pursuit of “Informed Hope” in the Stem Cell Discourse." The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(5), pp. 31–32

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.016
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.317 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of BioethicsSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207