Bibliographic record
Abstract
The past generation of antitrust has witnessed much intellectual competition among economists and competition-minded jurists as to what that body of law is supposed to do. The current antitrust generation has seen a pronounced shift in favor of the economic view of antitrust's role, to the diminution of any political or social objectives once thought to be important antitrust goals. Nonetheless, three developments over the past generation deleteriously separate antitrust law from economics. Antitrust suits sometimes interfere with private attempts to manage the commons. States' insistence on being involved in antitrust enforcement frequently results in harmful suits that make no economic sense. So does European enforcement of its own antitrust rules. The desires of both foreign enforcers and state attorneys general to assume larger roles on the global antitrust stage are particularly worth watching. How those issues are resolved in the next antitrust generation will extremely important.
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.018 |
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".