MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W605036577

Stem Cells in a Pluralistic Society: Consequences of Proposed Canadian Legislation

2003· article· en· W605036577 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dorothy C. Wertz, Marie-Hélène Régnier, Bartha Maria Knoppers

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationPolitical scienceLaw and economicsEnvironmental ethicsLawSociologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)Same topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207