MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113774858 · doi:10.1111/pbi.12488

Freedom‐to‐operate analysis of a transgenic multivitamin corn variety

2015· article· en· W2113774858 on OpenAlexaff
Daniela Zanga, Teresa Capell, Changfu Zhu, Paul Christou, Harry Thangaraj

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Biotechnology Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)CommercializationIntellectual propertyBiotechnologyBiologyProduction (economics)BusinessNatural resource economicsRisk analysis (engineering)MarketingLawEconomicsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we explore the intellectual property (IP) landscape relevant to the production and commercialization of Carolight(™) , a transgenic multivitamin corn variety created on humanitarian grounds to address micronutrient deficiencies in low-and-middle-income countries. The successful production of this variety requires IP rights risk management because there is a strong protection on inventions and processes via patent portfolios in both developing and industrialized countries. The IP framework is complex, and specialist patent lawyers are usually employed to perform such analysis, but the costs cannot always be met by small, publicly funded projects. We report an alternative strategy, a do-it-yourself patent analysis, to produce a review with limited legal value that can nevertheless lay the foundations for a subsequent more in-depth professional freedom-to-operate opinion.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Biotechnology JournalSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207