MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285168929 · doi:10.7202/1089796ar

COVID-19 : la levée du tabou autour du critère de l’âge ?

2022· article· fr· W4285168929 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Bioethics · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Philosophy2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Political scienceMedicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De manière générale, la référence à l’âge dans notre société est à la fois admise et sujette au débat. A l’instar d’autres pays, la pandémie COVID-19 en France a ébranlé la cohérence de notre système de santé. La peur engendrée a modifié les repères : la notion de triage est apparue et a succédé à celle de priorisation commune en médecine. Dans cette situation de crise sanitaire, est-ce que le recours éventuel au critère de l’âge est pertinent et peut-il remettre en cause le principe de justice entre les générations? Nous tenterons d’y répondre grâce aux éléments apportés par Axel Gosseries et Véronique Fournier lors d’une discussion organisée par l’association EthicA durant le congrès, les « Questions d’éthiques » à Nantes en novembre 2020.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.314 · 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