MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992773862 · doi:10.1089/glre.2009.13505

Canadian Tax Structuring for Gaming Ventures

2009· article· en· W1992773862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stuart Hoegner

Bibliographic record

VenueGaming Law Review and Economics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructuringDownloadVolume (thermodynamics)Tax lawAdvertisingBusinessEconomicsLaw and economicsPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawWorld Wide WebValue-added tax

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaming Law Review and EconomicsVol. 13, No. 6 ARTICLESCanadian Tax Structuring for Gaming VenturesStuart HoegnerStuart HoegnerSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:27 Dec 2009https://doi.org/10.1089/glre.2009.13505AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 13Issue 6Dec 2009 Information© 2009 Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.To cite this article:Stuart Hoegner.Canadian Tax Structuring for Gaming Ventures.Gaming Law Review and Economics.Dec 2009.469-477.http://doi.org/10.1089/glre.2009.13505Published in Volume: 13 Issue 6: December 27, 2009PDF download

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGaming Law Review and EconomicsSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207