MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264266593

Talking 'Bout My Antitrust Generation

2004· article· fr· W2264266593 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMerger and Competition Analysis
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnforcementCompetition (biology)Consent decreeLaw and economicsPoliticsCompetition lawEconomicsState (computer science)Rule of reasonPolitical scienceLawMarket economyMonopolySupreme court
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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)0.0270.006

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMerger and Competition AnalysisFrench-language works237,207