MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164672131

Complexity of public interest in ethical analysis of genomics

2010· article· en· W2164672131 on OpenAlexaffabout
James Tansey, Michael Burgess

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Assessment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>HabitatAquacultureTroutGeographyEnvironmental ethicsEnvironmental resource managementEcologyBiologyEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In one of the more provocative moves in recent years, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife proposed that Atlantic Salmon swimming freely within the waters of the Pacific Northwest ought to be classified as pollutants, an idea that certainly raises eyebrows about the legal implications were this approach adopted (Firestone and Barber, 2003). To make sense of this initiative, it helps to know that the salmon in question are not migrants from the Atlantic Ocean but escapees from the salmon farms along the coastline that is shared by the US and Canada. Despite their apparent similarities, there are significant genetic differences between Atlantic Salmon (actually a form of trout) and their Pacific cousins. The Department of Fish and Wildlife's interest is to provide a mechanism to protect native species against the potential colonisation of their habitat by escaped Atlantic salmon, but deliberate or not, it would also effectively place aquaculture in the same category as industrial plants that create point-source pollutants.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.274 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrated AssessmentSame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207