MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798338990 · doi:10.18042/cepc/redc.108.11

La reciente jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Estrasburgo y del Tribunal Supremo en Canadá en relación con el derecho a la muerte digna

2016· article· es· W2798338990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Santiago Cañamares Arribas

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Española de Derecho Constitucional · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and bioethics in healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalSupreme courtAutonomyLawHumanitiesPolitical scienceDerechoPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issues related to end of life situations have acquired great importance in today’s society, due to the increase in life expectancy as a result of the advances in medicine and the consolidation of the patient’s rights to autonomy. However, from a comparative approach neither legislation nor the case-law gives a clear answer to what scope should be recognized to this autonomy. This paper is focus on the different trends that can be currently found in wester legal systems in relation to the so called right to die with dignity in the light of the most recent pronouncements of the Strasbourg Court and the Supreme Court of Canada.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Española de Derecho ConstitucionalSame topicEthics and bioethics in healthcareFrench-language works237,207