MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Dominion of Bioethics

2011· book-chapter· en· W2505899774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea Frolic, Michael D. Coughlin, Bernard Keating

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioethicsDominionPoliticsNationalismIdentity (music)National identityPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsMeaning (existential)SociologySocial scienceLawEpistemologyAestheticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter provides a case study of the relationships between bioethics and the project and pitfalls of nation-building, raising crucial questions about the influence of history, culture, and politics on the enterprise of bioethics. It focuses on Canadian bioethics, which is preoccupied with questions of national identity and unique cultural meaning. Anxiety over what defines a Canadian and what makes Canada unique as a nation is fueled by perceived external and internal challenges to a coherent national identity, such as American popular culture and political influence, and Quebec nationalism.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.049
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.362
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207