MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170626316 · doi:10.7202/043044ar

Le placement privé de valeurs mobilières aux États-Unis

2005· article· fr· W2170626316 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xavier Barré

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les placements privés constituent un moyen privilégié d'accès aux marchés de capitaux américains. Dispensés d'enregistrement auprès de la SEC, les placements privés de valeurs mobilières offrent aux émetteurs l'avantage d'une plus grande flexibilité et d'un moindre coût, par rapport aux offres publiques de titres. Cet article décrit les conditions à remplir et les critères très précis dégagés par la jurisprudence américaine et la réglementation de la SEC, auxquels les émetteurs doivent se soumettre, en matière de nombre et de type d'investisseurs, d'informations à rendre publiques, etc. Dans de telles transactions, le conseil juridique doit se conformer à une procédure prédéterminée et entourer l'opération de précautions visant à conserver à l'émetteur, le privilège de l'exemption d'enregistrement. L'inconvénient principal du dispositif consiste en restrictions attachées à la revente des titres: l'investisseur s'engage à conserver les valeurs acquises pendant une période de deux ans. Cependant, la nouvelle règle 144A, adoptée par la SEC le 19 avril 1990, devrait rendre beaucoup plus souples les conditions de revente des titres et en particulier, bouleverser les conditions d'accès aux marchés financiers américains pour les émetteurs étrangers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.007

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicCorporate Governance and LawFrench-language works237,207