MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289804830 · doi:10.3917/ds.401.0003

Attention au chercheur ! L’éthique sous la menace de la recherche, la science sous l’emprise des comités d’éthique en recherche

2016· article· fr· W2289804830 on OpenAlexaff
Maritza Felices-Luna

Bibliographic record

VenueDéviance et Société · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article analyse les prémisses, les modalités d’action et le fonctionnement actuel des comités d’éthique en recherche (CÉR) comme étant basés sur une éthique procédurale dont l’adoption et l’application en tant que modèle sont hautement problématiques. D’une part, le chercheur est constitué en déviant potentiel, en être moralement suspect. D’autre part, la science étant désormais redéfinie en activité potentiellement dangereuse, les CÉR s’affairent à la contrôler et s’ingèrent ainsi dans la procédure scientifique. L’article conclut en proposant de penser l’éthique non pas comme un principe mesurable, vérifiable et maîtrisable, mais plutôt comme un point d’équilibre à atteindre entre les diverses parties concernées.

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)0.191
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.114
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1910.114
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0160.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.331
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.211 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDéviance et SociétéSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207