MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480155855 · doi:10.1177/0003603x16657216

Merger Efficiencies in Canada

2016· article· en· W2480155855 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roger Ware, Ralph A. Winter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Antitrust Bulletin · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTaxation and Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisdictionCompetition lawMerger controlCommercial lawMerger guidelinesEconomicsCompetition (biology)Competition policyWedge (geometry)Law and economicsLawPolitical scienceChoice of lawPublic economicsMicroeconomicsCommissionMonopoly

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In terms of solidifying the economic foundations of competition policy, Canadian merger law is much further advanced than merger law in any other jurisdiction. This article evaluates the developments in the Canadian law and draws both positive and negative lessons for integrating economic principles into merger law generally. The balancing weights test adopted in Canadian law for incorporating efficiencies into merger assessment has firm support in economics. But the implementation of this test has run into problems. A sharp wedge remains in Canada between the law and the economics of merger evaluation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0120.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Antitrust BulletinSame topicTaxation and Legal IssuesFrench-language works237,207