MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159024029 · doi:10.1007/s12152-021-09468-6

Recommendations for Responsible Development and Application of Neurotechnologies

2021· article· en· W3159024029 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Goering, Eran Klein, Laura Specker Sullivan, Anna Wexler, Blaise Agüera y Arcas, Guo‐Qiang Bi, Jose M. Carmena, Joseph J. Fins, Phoebe Friesen, Jack L. Gallant, Jane E. Huggins, Philipp Kellmeyer, Adam Marblestone, Christine Mitchell, Erik Parens, Michelle Pham, Alan Rubel, Norihiro Sadato, Mina Teicher, David Wasserman, Meredith Whittaker, Jonathan R. Wolpaw, Rafael Yuste

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroethics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeDivision of Biological InfrastructureU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)NeuroethicsEngineering ethicsIdentity (music)PsychologyDemocracyInternet privacyPolitical sciencePublic relationsNeuroscienceSociologyComputer scienceEngineeringLawSocial sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.132
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.274
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1320.274
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.015
Scholarly communication0.0240.033
Open science0.0100.017
Research integrity0.0760.043
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.022

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations214
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroethicsSame topicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsFrench-language works237,207