MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3005596226 · doi:10.32920/22227511

Relationally Speaking: The Implications of Treating Embryos as Property in a Canadian Context

2023· article· en· W3005596226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathleen Hammond

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppealProperty (philosophy)Context (archaeology)CategorizationLawPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeLaw and economicsSociologyHistoryPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In July 2018, the Ontario Superior Court, in S.H. v D.H., dealt with a dispute between a recently separated couple over a frozen embryo that the couple had created. In his judgment, Justice Del Frate stated that the embryo should be conceived of as property. This was the cause of uproar among feminist legal scholars who were concerned with the possible repercussions for cisgender women of labeling embryos as property. The Superior Court decision was subsequently overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal this past May (2019). However, given the likelihood that embryos will be treated as property in future disputes, it is important to assess what the ramifications of this type of categorization might be.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0470.053
Scholarly communication0.0160.007
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReproductive Health and Technologies→French-language works237,207→