Stem Cells in a Pluralistic Society: Consequences of Proposed Canadian Legislation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In December 2001, following an initiative taken by France and Germany, the United Nations put in place an Ad Hoc Committee to prepare an International Convention against the Reproductive Cloning of Human Beings.Recently, the possibility of a Convention was called into question when the United States demanded an international ban on therapeutic cloning as well.On December 26 th , 2002 the announcement by Clonaid of the supposed birth of a "cloned" baby caused worldwide consternation.Whether science fiction or reality, policymakers around the world need to act or be seen to act.These recent events have rekindled legislative interest in banning all procedures labeled cloning, even when certain procedures are not intended to create a baby.Stem cell research is embroiled in anti-cloning laws.In this initial edition of GenEdit, which will become a regular feature of HumGen (www.humgen.umontreal.ca),we will briefly examine the state of the science, followed by the legal, ethical, religious, and cultural issues surrounding embryonic stem cell 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.068 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".