THE REGULATION OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
List of figures -- List of tables -- List of contributors - - Acknowledgement -- List of abbreviations -- Introduction -- Ch. 1. Introduction / Helen Szoke and Jennifer Gunning -- Pt. I. ART legislation around the world -- Ch. 2. Current legislation in Europe / Shaun D. Pattinson -- Ch. 3. The HFEA - 10 years on / Ruth Deech -- Ch. 4. A survey of regulation of assisted reproductive technology in Asia / Jothi Kumar -- Ch. 5. Canada's proposal for legislation on assisted human reproduction / Francine Manseau -- Ch. 6. Regulating ART in the USA: a mixed approach / Jennifer Gunning -- Ch. 7. Development of regulation of assisted reproduction: a world view of early days / Louis Waller -- Ch. 8. Australia - a federated structure of statutory regulation of ART / Helen Szoke -- Ch. 9. The New Zealand way: ART within an ethical framework / Rosemary De Luca -- Pt. II. Access to ART -- Ch. 10. Access to assisted reproductive technology by people with high genetic risks and transmittable diseases / Guido Pennings -- Ch. 11. Should there be limits on who may access assisted reproductive services? A legal perspective / Kristen Walker -- Ch. 12. Lesbian couples in DI practice / Anne Brewaeys -- Ch. 13. Fertility rights: will the UK's human rights act make any difference to access to assisted conception treatment? / Eric Blyth -- Pt. III. Issues in the regulation of ART -- Ch. 14. Choosing a child's future? Reproductive decision-making and preimplantation genetic diagnosis / Belinda Bennett -- Ch. 15. Stored embryos and the value of genetic ties / Giuliana Fuscaldo -- Ch. 16. The public interest in embryos / Julian Savulescu -- Ch. 17. A new consultation management process for managing divergent community views: lesbian and single women's access to artificial insemination and ARTs / Leslie Cannold and Lynn Gillam -- Ch. 18. The Australian experience of self- accreditation / Douglas Saunders -- Ch. 19. Can the use of human embryos for research be banned or would that be unconstitutional in Australia? / Mark W. Richardson -- Ch. 20. 'Therapeutic cloning': tortious risk management issues / Brenda McGivern -- Index
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".