MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789173396

The Canadian Competition Authority releases an update of its draft enforcement abuse of dominance guidelines (Draft Enforcement Abuse of Dominance Guidelines)

2009· article· en· W2789173396 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karounga Diawara

Bibliographic record

Venuee-Competitions Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Contract Law
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)EnforcementCriminologyPolitical sciencePsychologyLawBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 16 January 2009 the Competition Bureau (the “Bureau”) released its Draft Enforcement Abuse of Dominance Guidelines (“Draft Guidelines”) that outline the Bureau's approach to enforcing the abuse of…

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.008
Science and technology studies0.0140.004
Scholarly communication0.0180.004
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0170.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.010

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuee-Competitions BulletinSame topicEuropean and International Contract LawFrench-language works237,207