MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161275662

Legal Origins Theory, Economic Development and Competition Law - Canada and Korea

2012· article· en· W2161275662 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hyung-Suk Yoon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaw and developmentEmpirical legal studiesCompetition (biology)Comparative lawPolitical scienceCompetition lawLegal historyLawDevelopment theoryEconomicsLaw and economicsEconomic growthDevelopment studiesMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Legal Origins Theory is a relatively recent school of thought developed by law and finance scholars within the framework of comparative legal studies. The proponents of the Theory posit that societies with different legal origins are associated with different legal rules, and these differently formed legal rules lead to different economic outcomes. The basic conclusion of the Theory suggest that common law based countries tend to do better as shown by economic indicators compared to civil law countries. The focus of this paper is to examine the Theory findings in two stages. First, it will consider whether the Theory can be used to explain the rapid economic development of Korea over the last few decades. Second, this paper will examine whether competition (fair trade) law falls within the ambit of the Theory. This paper attempts to arrive at the conclusion that different stages of economic development would better explain (rather than legal origins) the need and development of laws governing economic development. The framework of analysis is adopted from the work of Christopher A. Whytock, which I refer to as modified functional approach.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComparative and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207