MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enter the Foreign Regulator: The Canadian Initiative

2016· article· en· W23657172 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James C. Baillie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLaw, logistics, and international trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Research Resources
KeywordsLegislationJurisdictionFutures contractCommissionGovernment (linguistics)LawLegislatureCommodityPolitical scienceBusinessPublic administrationFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recent issue of a publication for Canadian lawyers ran a series of interviews with leading lawyers as to what they considered to have been the most important event of the past decade in Canadian law. The general counsel of Merrill Lynch's Canadian affiliate, Merrill Lynch Royal Securities Limited, said that adoption by Ontario of The Commodity Futures Act, in his view, was that event. This did something to alleviate the sense of inferiority that I experienced after seeing the heading of this section of your programme: Of Cold Calls, Canadians and Collapses. Seriously, I feel our new legislation is a desirable innovation, although I cannot agree that it is the most important Canadian legal event of the decade. Certainly it has been long aborning. It had its genesis in the report of a committee established by the Ontario Government in 1975. Ontario has no commodity futures exchange, but the Committee concluded that Ontario residents who engaged in speculative transactions on exchanges in other jurisdictions required some protection. In 1978, the Ontario Legislature adopted The Commodity Futures Act to implement the committee's recommendations. That Act came into force on September 1, 1979. It is administered by the Ontario Securities Commission, referred to as the OSC. So far as we are aware, this new Act makes Ontario the first jurisdiction outside the United States to adopt a regulatory pattern of this type, although several other Canadian provinces are considering the adoption of legislation uniform with Ontario's. In determining the details of our rules, we have derived much help from the rules of the CFTC. Obviously, there are fundamental differences that precluded us from simply adopting those rules. Accordingly, in the preparation of the Act and of the regulations, we have had to make a number of pragmatic decisions to arrive at a regulatory pattern that, we believe, reconciles workability with adequate protection for Ontario speculators. In this effort, we have been grateful for the assistance and guidance of the CFTC and members of its staff. A number of commodity futures exchanges in the United States have also been prepared to cooperate in our work; representatives of the Chicago Board of Trade spoke with us and showed us the Board's facilities.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.003

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLaw, logistics, and international tradeFrench-language works237,207