MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1870865895

Network neutrality: what, where and why?

2011· article· en· W1870865895 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Naqeeb Ahmed Kazia, Shringarika Priyadarshini

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNet neutralityNeutralityThe InternetLaw and economicsLawComputer sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network neutrality is among the most disputed concepts in the World of technology. It precisely seeks to provide open access to all the online data to every user of the internet network without being discriminated by the ISP. This article deals with what is network neutrality, where is the law as to the concept i.e. countries which have adopted net neutrality laws and why is it needed? The authors have tried to explain the concept with the help of various definitions provided by the originators of the concept. For a better understanding of the concept, the article deals with the different types of network neutrality along with an economic analysis. The article also provides an insight on the advantages and drawbacks of the concept. Further, the authors have dealt with the network neutrality around the world which includes countries with network neutrality laws and the legal status in countries like India, Canada and the United States of America as to the concept of network neutrality. Finally the authors have concluded with their propositions on the need of network neutrality law for the protection of Consumers‟ interest.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.015
Scholarly communication0.0110.024
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicICT Impact and Policies→French-language works237,207→