MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409218487 · doi:10.1080/15265161.2025.2470657

Consent Is Dead, Long Live Ethical Oversight: Integrating Ethically Sourced Data into Demonstrated Consent Models

2025· letter· en· W4409218487 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Christophe Bélisle‐Pipon, Vardit Ravitsky

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Bioethics · 2025
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersCommon Fund for Commodities
KeywordsInformed consentPsychologyInternet privacyEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceEngineeringAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Barnes et al. (2025) propose a demonstrated consent model that seeks to address challenges in modern biomedicine by transforming consent from a static, one-time transaction into a dynamic process. ...

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.020
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0030.037
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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.232 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of BioethicsSame topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207