MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388451017 · doi:10.25071/2817-5344/58

High Stakes

2023· article· en· W4388451017 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Academic Mind · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegalizationDecriminalizationBlack marketAddictionOrder (exchange)Political scienceHoaxBusinessMedicinePsychiatryLawAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decriminalization and legalization of illicit drugs have been hot topics ever since they hit the black market, and they have progressed a long way since. The history and subject of drugs continues to be a controversial topic, but it is evident that we still need change. This essay differentiates the concepts of decriminalization and legalization, their effects on drug policy, and their impacts on the user, and argues for the legalization of illicit drugs in Canada. It is argued that the legalization of illicit drugs allows for proper addiction treatment, safe consumption, addresses the large amounts of overdoses and opioid crisis and reduces stigmatization. Systemic and fundamental change is needed in order to prioritize the health, safety, and well-being of society as a whole.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Academic MindSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207