Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.095 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".