MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156865791 · doi:10.7202/043003ar

Quelques réflexions sur la notion de statut humain

2005· article· fr· W2156865791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marlène Maltais

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La biogénétique et les recherches médicales font l'objet de plusieurs théories en ce qui a trait à leurs conséquences juridiques. Notre héritage de droit civil sera-t-il capable d'encadrer les phénomènes issus des conquêtes sur la nature ? Question de commercialité, question de nature, mais premièrement question humaine. Il existe des risques dans l'application du droit à ces phénomènes : (1) rupture avec nos assises juridiques, celles qui ont façonné notre manière d'être et de vivre; (2) l'éclatement départies entières du droit, par exemple le droit des personnes. En reconnaissant nos assises juridiques pour ce qu'elles produisent dans notre présent — plus qu'en tant que simples repères historiques — il devient plus facile de comprendre l'impact réel de la biotechnologie. Après quoi il devient possible d'inventer des solutions en relation directe avec notre héritage. On doit demeurer conscient de la nécessité de ne pas créer de rupture.

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 categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207