The Construction of the Legal Environment of the Transformation of the Scientific and Technological Achievements in China
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 transformation of scientific and technological achievements is a very important way that combines economy with science and technology. A good legal environment can push the transformation of scientific and technological achievements. Based on the normative analysis of the relevant laws issued by the National People’s Congress or State Council, it is found that there are some problems in the legal system of the transformation of scientific and technological achievements in China The law of promoting the transformation of scientific and technological achievements is too lagged and inflexible; the governmental functions in the transformation of scientific and technological achievements are not clear; The legal protection mechanism on the funds of the transformation of scientific and technological achievements is not perfect; The legal system of scientific and technological intermediary services is not good enough. Through the content analysis, we put forward several suggestions. Amending the law of promoting the transformation of scientific and technological achievements and enhancing the operability of the law; protecting the government to give full play to its functions in the transformation of scientific and technological achievements through legislation; Improving the legal safeguard mechanism on the funds of the transformation of scientific and technological achievements; Clarify the relevant provisions of the scientific and technological intermediaries and improving the mechanism of legal supervision.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 it