MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468987550 · doi:10.1080/17449626.2016.1193553

Introduction to the symposium on<i>The Most Good You Can Do</i>

2016· article· en· W2468987550 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Ethics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaw and economicsSociologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsEngineering ethicsPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our world is awash in preventable and undeserved misery.The World Bank Group (Cruz et al. 2015) estimates that currently about 9.6% of the global population or 702 million people live in extreme poverty or on less than US $1.90 per day.The extremely poor are unable to meet their most basic needs for nutrition, medical care, and shelter.As a result, they suffer and/or die from preventable illness and disease and malnutrition.Sub-Saharan Africa is particularly hard hit: it is estimated that about 35% of its population is extremely poor (Cruz et al. 2015).Unsurprisingly, this region has the highest under-five mortality rate on the planet.The extremely poor are not the only ones living wretched lives.Each year vast numbers of non-human animals suffer and are killed in order to produce inexpensive, palatable foodstuffs.Billions of broiler chickens, for instance, are kept in cramped, polluted conditions, unable to engage in species-specific behavior, causing them to suffer from disease and to experience debilitating stress.The fact that they are bred to gain weight quickly only adds to their misery; their bone structure is often unable to support their bulk, leading to disability and deformity.At the end of their short lives, such chickens are deprived of food, captured, shipped in horrid conditions to slaughterhouses, and then killed (often painfully and brutally).The misery produced by extreme poverty and by our treatment of non-human animals calls for some kind of practical response.Much of this suffering and premature death is, after all, preventable, often easily so.There are, however, deep divisions over how best to respond in practice.One response to extreme poverty involves advocating for donations (or provisions of labor) to philanthropic organizations dedicated to preventing premature death and/or to preventing or alleviating suffering due to it.In the case of non-human animals, one response is to avoid consuming them and the products derived from them, especially those produced in factory farms, where conditions are inordinately despicable, and to donate (or labor for) charities aiming to improve the plight of non-human animals.This raises a number of moral questions.Should one respond in this way?How much should one contribute to philanthropic organizations, if in fact one should do so?How should one give?Through which conduits should one direct one's contributions?Peter Singer has devoted his career in part to dealing with these questions.His work (1972, 1993) on what the global wealthy ought to do in response to extreme poverty

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.224 · 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