The Geometry of Language: Understanding LLMs in Bioethics.

IF 1.5 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Aníbal M Astobiza
{"title":"The Geometry of Language: Understanding LLMs in Bioethics.","authors":"Aníbal M Astobiza","doi":"10.1007/s11673-025-10480-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, I explored the application of large language models (LLMs) in analysing linguistic colexification and ambiguity within bioethical scenarios. By employing word embeddings derived from LLMs, I constructed semantic distance matrices that provide insight into the relationships between key terms in bioethical vignettes. These matrices were used to quantify and visualize the degree of linguistic ambiguity and specificity across different versions of each vignette-those with high colexification (ambiguous language) and those with low colexification (specific language). The approach taken involves encoding words according to their semantic adjacency and representing these relationships geometrically through distance matrices. The resulting matrices reflect the nuanced differences in how concepts are related within bioethical contexts, offering a quantitative method for analysing language use. The study demonstrates that LLMs, by facilitating geometric representations of language, can enhance our understanding of complex ethical dilemmas by systematically addressing linguistic ambiguity. Ultimately, this research contributes to the field of bioethics by providing a computational approach to improving clarity in ethical communication, highlighting the potential of LLMs to inform both ethical decision-making and discourse analysis. LLMs, while not capable of performing speech acts in the full philosophical sense-as human beings do-still serve as powerful tools to analyse and understand bioethical language. This distinction-between performing speech acts and analysing their linguistic features-highlights the unique contribution of LLMs as analytical tools rather than ethical agents.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-025-10480-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I explored the application of large language models (LLMs) in analysing linguistic colexification and ambiguity within bioethical scenarios. By employing word embeddings derived from LLMs, I constructed semantic distance matrices that provide insight into the relationships between key terms in bioethical vignettes. These matrices were used to quantify and visualize the degree of linguistic ambiguity and specificity across different versions of each vignette-those with high colexification (ambiguous language) and those with low colexification (specific language). The approach taken involves encoding words according to their semantic adjacency and representing these relationships geometrically through distance matrices. The resulting matrices reflect the nuanced differences in how concepts are related within bioethical contexts, offering a quantitative method for analysing language use. The study demonstrates that LLMs, by facilitating geometric representations of language, can enhance our understanding of complex ethical dilemmas by systematically addressing linguistic ambiguity. Ultimately, this research contributes to the field of bioethics by providing a computational approach to improving clarity in ethical communication, highlighting the potential of LLMs to inform both ethical decision-making and discourse analysis. LLMs, while not capable of performing speech acts in the full philosophical sense-as human beings do-still serve as powerful tools to analyse and understand bioethical language. This distinction-between performing speech acts and analysing their linguistic features-highlights the unique contribution of LLMs as analytical tools rather than ethical agents.

语言的几何学:理解生物伦理学的法学硕士。
在这篇文章中,我探讨了大型语言模型(llm)在分析生物伦理场景中的语言共化和歧义中的应用。通过使用源自法学硕士的词嵌入,我构建了语义距离矩阵,可以深入了解生物伦理学小片段中关键术语之间的关系。这些矩阵被用来量化和可视化每个小插曲的不同版本的语言歧义和特异性的程度——那些高共化的(模糊语言)和那些低共化的(特定语言)。采用的方法包括根据语义邻接性对单词进行编码,并通过距离矩阵以几何方式表示这些关系。由此产生的矩阵反映了生物伦理学背景下概念之间的微妙差异,为分析语言使用提供了定量方法。研究表明,法学硕士通过促进语言的几何表征,可以通过系统地解决语言歧义,增强我们对复杂伦理困境的理解。最终,本研究通过提供一种计算方法来提高伦理沟通的清晰度,突出了法学硕士在伦理决策和话语分析方面的潜力,从而为生物伦理学领域做出了贡献。法学硕士虽然不能像人类那样在完全的哲学意义上进行言语行为,但仍然是分析和理解生物伦理语言的有力工具。这种区别——表演言语行为和分析其语言特征之间的区别——突出了法学硕士作为分析工具而不是道德代理人的独特贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The JBI welcomes both reports of empirical research and articles that increase theoretical understanding of medicine and health care, the health professions and the biological sciences. The JBI is also open to critical reflections on medicine and conventional bioethics, the nature of health, illness and disability, the sources of ethics, the nature of ethical communities, and possible implications of new developments in science and technology for social and cultural life and human identity. We welcome contributions from perspectives that are less commonly published in existing journals in the field and reports of empirical research studies using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The JBI accepts contributions from authors working in or across disciplines including – but not limited to – the following: -philosophy- bioethics- economics- social theory- law- public health and epidemiology- anthropology- psychology- feminism- gay and lesbian studies- linguistics and discourse analysis- cultural studies- disability studies- history- literature and literary studies- environmental sciences- theology and religious studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信