La protección de la diversidad en el patrimonio genético: implicaciones bioéticas y jurídicas en el uso de CRISPR-Cas9 como herramienta de edición genómica en humanos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objetivo de este artículo es comprender cómo el CRISPR-Cas9 puede funcionar como una tecnología viable en la construcción del proyecto de parentalidad para promover el ejercicio de la libertad en el proceso de autonomía reproductiva. Sin embargo, a pesar de la posibilidad del uso en la línea germinal humana, se intentó investigar los límites y el alcance de esta percepción de libertad. Así, a través del uso de investigaciones documentales y bibliográficas, se buscaron datos sobre la viabilidad de la preservación del patrimonio genético como expresión de la diversidad en la humanidad. De esta forma, se percibió que es necesario superar pensamientos higienistas de limpiar “defectos”, considerando que toda vida es digna de ser vivida.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".