Commentary on the Olivieri symposium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Bioethics Society has taken some constructive steps in its attempt to learn from the Olivieri case We would like to thank the authors and editors of the JME’s minisymposium on the Olivieri case in the February 2004 issue of the journal for continuing and extending the dialogue about this important challenge to the North American bioethics community. This minisymposium is of special interest to us as members of the Canadian Bioethics Society’s (CBS) working group on employment standards for bioethics. We are members of this working group precisely because we believe that most of us in the Canadian bioethics community ought to do more to respond to situations such as the Olivieri/Apotex affair. We welcome the opportunity to continue to learn from the case and …
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 | 0.019 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.042 | 0.060 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".