MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366286012 · doi:10.1515/ci-2023-0203

Ethics of Chemistry

2023· article· en· W4366286012 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicChemistry and Chemical Engineering
Canadian institutionsThe King's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistWagePolitical scienceEngineering ethicsLawChemistryEnvironmental ethicsSociologyEngineeringOrganic chemistryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Imagine yourself a chemist confronted with the use of chemical weapons during World War IO. Or a citizen living in Bhopal, India, perhaps having negotiated the siting of the plant in your city as a politician or an employee bringing home a good wage working at Union Carbide’s methyl isocyanate plant. Or perhaps you are a student in 2023 needing to make informed choices about climate engineering or the rapid full-scale extraction of rare-earth materials to mitigate the climate crisis. What is the right thing to do in each of these scenarios? How can the study of the moral values, norms, judgments, and virtues relevant to chemistry equip students to deeply reflect about the practice of chemistry and guide them to make informed and responsible choices about their behaviour as professionals?

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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