Bibliographic record
Abstract
The criteria articulated in the previous chapter raise a number of questions, some of which have to do with the criteria themselves, and some with broader issues. The first question that needs to be dealt with is precisely what the criteria apply to . Specifically, I have been speaking of PS1, SS2, AS3, and RE4, that is, preemptive, surcease, and assisted suicide at the three stages described in Chapter 2, and requested euthanasia at the fourth stage. More generally, I have been speaking of choosing to die and elective death. To deal best with the question of exactly what the criteria apply to, I need to speak of suicide in particular, meaning PS1, SS2, and AS3, and exclude RE4 except where explicitly mentioned. Since the criteria are offered as a way to establish when suicide is rational, it may seem odd to raise the question of the nature of the object of their application, but as mentioned before, there is currently a significant amount of confusion that glosses the differences among suicide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia. It is important, then, to make as clear as possible what it is that is to be assessed as rational or otherwise, and so as possibly morally permissible. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy has it that “the most conventional definition of ‘suicide’ is intentionally caused self destruction.” Difficulties begin with how “self-destruction” is understood.
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 | 0.077 | 0.191 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".