MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108079712 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2020.26356

Commentary: Cautionary Notes on Exemption Elimination

2020· letter· fr· W3108079712 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lori G. Beaman

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2020
Typeletter
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlourishingPoint (geometry)PopulationDemocracyOrder (exchange)Law and economicsPower (physics)Space (punctuation)Range (aeronautics)Political scienceInternet privacySociologyLawComputer scienceBusinessPsychologySocial psychologyPoliticsEngineeringMathematicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A flourishing democracy should have a great deal of space for a wide range of beliefs and practices. The issue of vaccine hesitancy requires that we have as much data and information as possible in order to determine the precise point at which those beliefs and practices may endanger others or the population as a whole. Imposing restrictions before determining that point is about power rather than protection, and ultimately alienates portions of the population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207