ABSTRACT
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform many aspects of scholarly publishing. Authors, peer reviewers, and editors might use AI in a variety of ways, and those uses might augment their existing work or might instead be intended to replace it. We are editors of bioethics and humanities journals who have been contemplating the implications of this ongoing transformation. We believe that generative AI may pose a threat to the goals that animate our work but could also be valuable for achieving those goals. In the interests of fostering a wider conversation about how generative AI may be used, we have developed a preliminary set of recommendations for its use in scholarly publishing. We hope that the recommendations and rationales set out here will help the scholarly community navigate toward a deeper understanding of the strengths, limits, and challenges of AI for responsible scholarly work.
Subject(s)
Editorial Policies , Publishing , Humans , Scholarly Communication , Artificial Intelligence , TechnologyABSTRACT
In the original publication [...].
ABSTRACT
There are some distinct methodological challenges, and possible pitfalls, for neuroethics when it evaluates neuroscientific results and links them to issues such as moral or legal responsibility. Some problems emerge in determining the requirements for responsibility. We will show how philosophical proposals in this area need to interact with legal doctrine and practice. Problems can occur when inferring normative implications from neuroscientific results. Other problems arise when it is not recognized that data about brain anatomy or physiology are relevant to the ascription of responsibility only when they are significantly correlated with the psychological capacities contemplated by the legal formulations of responsibility. We will demonstrate this by considering two significant cases concerning psychopathy. Some paradigms that aim at measuring higher-order capacities, such as moral understanding, have limited validity. More robust paradigms for the study of learning in restricted controlled conditions, on the other hand, have limited ecological validity across individuals and context to be of any use for the law.
Subject(s)
Morals , Neurosciences , Brain , Humans , Social BehaviorABSTRACT
Dam construction and longitudinal river habitat fragmentation disrupt important life histories and movement of aquatic species. This is especially true for Oncorhynchus mykiss that exhibits both migratory (steelhead) and non-migratory (resident rainbow) forms. While the negative effects of dams on salmonids have been extensively documented, few studies have had the opportunity to compare population genetic diversity and structure prior to and following dam removal. Here we examine the impacts of the removal of two dams on the Elwha River on the population genetics of O. mykiss. Genetic data were produced from >1200 samples collected prior to dam removal from both life history forms, and post-dam removal from steelhead. We identified three genetic clusters prior to dam removal primarily explained by isolation due to dams and natural barriers. Following dam removal, genetic structure decreased and admixture increased. Despite large O. mykiss population declines after dam construction, we did not detect shifts in population genetic diversity or allele frequencies of loci putatively involved in migratory phenotypic variation. Steelhead descendants from formerly below and above dammed populations recolonized the river rapidly after dam removal, suggesting that dam construction did not significantly reduce genetic diversity underlying O. mykiss life history strategies. These results have significant evolutionary implications for the conservation of migratory adaptive potential in O. mykiss populations above current anthropogenic barriers.