Bibliographic record
Abstract
The patent system is making progress and incorporating international practice at a tremendous pace in China. However, scholars have been raising doubts to the benefits of the patent system. They believe that the social costs borne by the developing countries for the patent system exceed the overall economic gains in the current international circumstances. China’s current patent system indicates that there is a lack of sufficient understanding of the social costs and of the cost-benefit analysis of the patent system, which causes many controversies. Nowadays the related study is still struggling to quantify the social cost, while the qualitative analysis is highly disputed. However, an anatomy of the social costs is necessary to take specific cost control measures for the purpose of establishing an economically more efficient patent system suitable under China’s current circumstances. Key words: Patent, Social Costs, Patent System Resume: Pas a pas, la construction sur le systeme de patente en Chine est bien developpe avec les coutumes internationals, relativement, les savants sont suspicieux sur l'efficacite de ce systeme parce qu'il a desequilibre le cout social des pays en developpements avec le profit economic du monde entier, les pays en developpements sont bien inquiets. Le systeme de patente chinois a un grand defaut dont l'analyse sur le cout-l'efficacite n'est pas suffisante，et il provoque pas mal de contestation. Maintenat, l'analyse sur le cout social du systeme de patente n'a pas encore fait une conclusion precise, mais il est necessaire de bien analyzer de divers couts sociaux quand on forge le systeme de patente, afin qu'on puisse fonder un systeme qui peut bien controler le cout et peut bien adaptable a la situation du pays. Mots-Cles: La patente, le systeme de patente, le cout social
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".