¿De qué hablan los medios cuando hablan de propiedad intelectual? Un análisis comprada de contenido en la prensa de calidad
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper seeks to present the principal aspects and rights (moral, financial- operational or of related nature) dealt with by the leading quality media of a representtative sample of the two main legal traditions: common law (with the copyright system) and civil law (with the authors rights system). A content analysis is conducted on the news published by the aforementioned media in the United States (The New York Times, The Washington Post); Canada (The Globe and Mail, La Presse); France (Le Monde, Le Figaro); Spain (El Pais, El Mundo); Italy (La Repubblica, Corriere della Sera); and the United Kingdom (The Guardian, The Times), in the opening months of 2014, when several reforms were made in intellectual property, both within these nations and in supranational structures (European Union, WIPO-OMPI).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it