MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411355028 · doi:10.1177/29768640251344065

Laying the foundations for AI justice in uncertain times

2025· article· en· W4411355028 on OpenAlexaff
Teresa Scassa

Bibliographic record

VenueDialogues on Digital Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLayingEconomic JusticeEngineering ethicsSociologyPolitical scienceEngineeringLawMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The race by governments and industry to exploit the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) raises concerns over prioritizing economic gains over community-based rights. This heightens the urgency of efforts to develop a justice-based framework for AI governance. Despite the European Union's AI Act, international AI governance remains fragmented, particularly as the U.S. pivots toward an innovation-first approach. Principles of data justice and data governance offer a solid foundation on which to build a framework for equitable AI governance, particularly as broader human rights principles become more fragmented and contested.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.087
Scholarly communication0.0220.031
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0110.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDialogues on Digital SocietySame topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207