MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W245365127

From Clones to Packets: The Development of Competition in Local Residential Telecommunications

2005· article· en· W245365127 on OpenAlexaffabout
Willie Grieve, Stanford L. Levin

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsTelus (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoice over IPUniversal serviceCompetition (biology)TelecommunicationsBusinessThe InternetInternet service providerService (business)Service providerIndustrial organizationMarketingComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

his paper explores the development of local telecommunications competition and the role of regulation in North America, from the original expectation that new entrants would look like the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILEC clones) to the current, and more promising, entry by companies using the Internet’s packet technology to provide telephone service (Voice over Internet Protocol or VoIP). Policies were put in place by federal and state regulators that were sometimes consistent, and sometimes inconsistent, with permitting facilities-based entry by ILEC clones, and these polices are now being reconsidered in light of the experience with this type of entry. New policies are now required to permit entry by VoIP service providers, and these policies must be reconciled with the previous local telecommunications competition policies that were put in place. Comparing and contrasting U. S. and Canadian regulatory policy can often provide some useful insights into the development of local exchange competition. The paper offers a framework for analyzing VoIP service that illuminates the regulatory and policy issues that must be addressed.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207