MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413969342 · doi:10.1177/25731599251367318

Global Observatory for Genome Editing Summit Statement: Call for a Charter on Emerging Technologies and Human Dignity

2025· article· en· W4413969342 on OpenAlex
Françoise Βaylis, John H. Evans, Tim D. Hunt, J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Sheila Jasanoff, Douglas A. Kysar, Katherine Littler, Laurence Lwoff, Peter Mills, Jacob Moses, Matthew H. Porteus, Krishanu Saha, O. Carter Snead, Kaushik Sunder Rajan, David E. Winickoff, Carrie D. Wolinetz

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

VenueThe CRISPR Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsRoyal Society of CanadaRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsCharterSummitDignityObservatoryStatement (logic)Genome editingPolitical scienceComputer scienceGenomeBiologyGeographyGeneticsLawGeneCartographyAstronomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The organizing committee of the 2025 Global Observatory for Genome Editing conference proposes a Charter on Emerging Technologies and Human Dignity. The development of this Charter is guided by four principles: (1) begin with questions of human dignity and the common good; (2) reconsider current innovation systems and the consequences for the distribution of benefits and risks; (3) expand the range of questions for deliberation; and (4) reimagine the limits of research.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.327 · 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