MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411255937 · doi:10.1007/s10730-025-09551-y

MAiD: How Slippery is its Slope?

2025· article· en· W4411255937 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tom Koch

Bibliographic record

VenueHEC Forum · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsZymeworks (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlippery slopeMedical lawPhilosophy of medicinePhilosophyPolitical scienceLawEpistemologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a November 2024 article of this journal Don A. Merrill suggested Tom Koch's (2023) article "A Skeptic's Report" either misunderstood or did not understand a "slippery slope argument". That article was an attempt to answer earlier authors who asked if the concerns of researchers prior to enabling legislation had been fulfilled. The "slippery slope" was one. In this article, the nature of those early concerns are again considered in relation to the nature of the "slippery slope event" that has resulted in an increasing annual number of deaths with progressively looser requirements for early medical termination. Like the original article, it uses Health Canada data to describe what has occurred, not a predictive argument on what may be.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHEC ForumSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207