La loi sur la protection des obtentions végétales; entre compétitivité et utopie, y a-t-il un avenir pour le modèle? (Is There a Future for the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act? Between Competitiveness and Utopia)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Y a-t-il un avenir pour le regime de la Loi sur la protection des obtentions vegetales? Cet article analyse les deux vagues majeures de legislation entourant la protection et la stimulation des investissements dans le domaine des obtentions vegetales au Canada et dans l‘Union europeenne. Le Canada pourrait-il saisir sa chance et devenir un acteur de premier plan? Qui plus est, que peut-on apprendre et transposer d‘un regime de propriete intellectuelle sectoriel vers un regime general?English Abstract: Is there a future for the scheme of the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act? This article analyzes the two major waves of legislation surrounding the protection and promotion of investments in the field of plant varieties in Canada and the European Union. Could Canada seize an opportunity and become a major player? Moreover, what can a general IP regime learn from such a specific statute?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".