MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417628639

Alcune riflessioni sulla «bioetica» di Potter

2012· article· it· W2417628639 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fernando Pascual Lc

Bibliographic record

VenueAlpha Omegan · 2012
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldComputer Science
TopicBioethics and Human Rights Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioethicsPhilosophyUtilitarianismAbortionHuman speciesBirth controlEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyLaw and economicsTheologySociologyLawPolitical sciencePregnancyDemographyAnthropologyBiologyGenetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Van Rensselaer Potter is purportedly the inventor of the term bioethics which is seen as the science that permits us to employ our knowledge in order to guarantee the survival of the human species on earth. Van Rensselaer Potter's proposal presupposes a kind of mecchanistics and strong utilitarianism; elements, which render it problematic and incline it to admit without much ado abortion as a means of birth control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlpha OmeganSame topicBioethics and Human Rights IssuesFrench-language works237,207