MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1808059804

Equipping the Garage Guys in Law

2011· article· en· W1808059804 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gillian K. Hadfield

Bibliographic record

VenueMaryland law review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNature versus nurtureLegal educationLawCurriculumGlobalizationLegal professionValue (mathematics)Political scienceBusinessSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Somewhere there's a 26-year-old out trying to destroy your business." 1 I.A CLASSROOM EXPERIMENT Recently, I conducted an experiment.Prompted by a student who had established a new joint law school-business school student group at the University of Southern California, I ran an extracurricular case study session in which J.D. and M.B.A. students worked together to find a solution for a real company facing a very real business challenge.The case involved a startup in Toronto called Innovation Exchange 2 ("IX"), an online open innovation platform connecting sponsor companies posting innovation challenges (for example, a new type of yogurt container or a new banking product) with a community of innovators.3 Innovation Exchange was encountering the following problem: In a significant number of cases, getting potential sponsor companies to sign up was slowed down or even halted by the complexity and legalese of their contract.As CEO Stephen Benson put the challenge, "It would be great if we could get this thing down to a page or two of easily readable content that the nonlawyer Chief Innovation Officer of a potential sponsor company could easily understand and communicate internally."Copyright  2011 by Gillian K. Hadfield.* Many thanks to my J.D. students in Advanced Contracts at USC and to the students

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaryland law reviewSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207