MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531825921

Should They Stay or Should They Go: Applying the Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine to Foreign Plaintiffs Injured Abroad in Abad v. Bayer Corporation

2009· article· en· W2531825921 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leah B. Moon

Bibliographic record

VenueSeventh Circuit Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlaintiffCorporationProduct liabilityDoctrineProduct (mathematics)HarmHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)BusinessInternational tradeLawGlobalizationPolitical scienceLiabilityMedicineVirology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As globalization continues to make it easier for U.S. companies to export their products abroad, a defective product can cause lifethreatening harm to consumers throughout the world. For example, when U.S. drug companies exported defective blood clotting products to hemophiliacs worldwide, reports of hemophiliacs infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (“HIV”) arose in France, Japan, Iran, Canada, and Portugal, among other countries. When the product of a U.S. company injures a consumer outside of U.S. borders, the foreign plaintiff must choose the forum in which to bring suit. Historically, U.S. courts have been an attractive forum for foreign plaintiffs,

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0280.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeventh Circuit ReviewSame topicCorporate Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207