Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to respond to scientific advances in reproductive and genetic technologies and to the profound social, ethical, legal, and health questions they raise, the Canadian government established the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (NRTs) in 1989. The government of Canada tabled its first piece of comprehensive legislation on NRTs on June 14, 1996, The intent of the Human Reproductive and Genetic Technologies Act is to protect Canadians from unsafe and unethical uses of technology in the area of human reproduction. It prohibits cloning, interspecies reproduction, germline genetic engineering, the use of ova from fetuses and cadavers for human reproduction, sex selection for other than medical uses, ectogenesis, in vitro fertilization for embryo research, mediated and paid surrogacy, and the purchase and sale of human gametes. Health Canada developed the Framework for Action on Sexual and Reproductive Health in 1998 with the participation of other federal departments as well as provincial, territorial, and nongovernment representatives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.086 | 0.015 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".