MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123660677

Combating Resistance: The Case for a Global Antibiotics Treaty

2010· article· en· W3123660677 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan Anomaly

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScience, Research, and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyMontreal ProtocolAutonomyResistance (ecology)Kyoto ProtocolCollective actionPolitical scienceLaw and economicsAction (physics)State (computer science)LawEconomicsOzone layerClimate changeComputer scienceEcologyGeographyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of antibiotics by one person can profoundly affect the welfare of other people. I will argue that efforts to combat antimicrobial resistance generate a global collective action problem that only a well-designed international treaty can overcome. I begin by describing the problem of resistance and outlining some market-friendly policy tools that participants in a global treaty could use to control the problem. I then defend the claim that these policies can achieve their aim while protecting individual liberty and state autonomy. Finally, I offer some suggestions for a treaty, drawing lessons from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change and the success of the Montreal Protocol on ozone depletion. © 2010 The Author.

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)0.017
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.027
Scholarly communication0.0090.016
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0240.024
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)Same topicScience, Research, and MedicineFrench-language works237,207