Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Internet has revolutionized the way in which we communicate. We take instantaneous, affordable, global communication for granted. With the remarkable benefits the Internet confers, however, come concomitant dangers and abuse. The Internet is, at the same time, a bulwark for global freedom of expression, and a medium of potentially limitless international defamation. The once sharp lines between the old and new media are blurring faster than could have been imagined a few short years ago. Television, radio, telecommunications, and the print media are increasingly delivered via Internet protocols. Mobile telephones, laptop computers, and the new generation of handheld devices provide always-on Internet access. The Internet is converging with, or displacing to a greater or lesser degree, and at an incredible pace, every other form of communication. The law of defamation and the Internet has thus become, in a very real sense, the modern law of defamation. The original edition of The Law of Defamation and the Internet (2001) was the first text to analyze comprehensively the application of common law principles of defamation law to material published online. It quickly became the standard text for media and information technology practitioners and students seeking to understand this novel area of the law, a fact cemented by the second edition (2005). The book has been widely cited and attracted praise throughout the common law world for its clarity and practical approach; its thorough treatment of the law; its use of international comparative material; and its analysis of relevant principles of jurisdiction and choice of law. The third edition takes The Law of Defamation and the Internet to a new level. As well as comprehensively updating the burgeoning law in the field, the coverage of general principles of defamation law has been significantly expanded. The research base has been widened to include more extensive coverage of authorities from jurisdictions including Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore. Other new features include expanded coverage of American law and an appendix of significant damages verdicts in Internet defamation actions. The new edition is an indispensable resource for all practitioners and students of defamation law.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it