MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

De cómo los derechos de autor deberían cambiar para ajustarse a la tecnología: (o, ¿desde cuándo es buena idea dejar que las discográficas diseñen los tocadiscos?. O de cómo arreglar los derechos de autor y salvar internet, la sociedad civil y la mayor biblioteca de la historia)

2008· article· es· W18914238 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cory Doctorow, Javier Candeira

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerva: Revista del Círculo de Bellas Artes · 2008
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicData Privacy and Cybersecurity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cory Doctorow (Toronto, 1971), novelista y activista digital, visitó el CBA en enero de 2005 con motivo de la presentación pública de las licencias Creative Commons España. En este artículo, trascripción revisada de la conferencia que pronunció entonces, expone sus argumentos a favor de una transformación de la legislación sobre la propiedad intelectual para que se ajuste a las tecnologías de la comunicación contemporáneas.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.042
Scholarly communication0.0230.023
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinerva: Revista del Círculo de Bellas ArtesSame topicData Privacy and CybersecurityFrench-language works237,207