MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789566632 · doi:10.4324/9780203814574-20

Policy Options for Internet Gambling

2012· book-chapter· en· W2789566632 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRoutledge eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaGeographyPolitical scienceEconomyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online gambling exists on a legal continuum. Currently, several countries prohibit most or all forms of online gambling. This includes Bermuda, Cambodia, China, Cuba, Germany, Greece, India, Malaysia, Romania, South Africa, and the Ukraine. In addition, many (predominantly Islamic) countries ban online gambling by virtue of their ban on all forms of gambling: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Libya, Mali, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen (Online Casino Suite, 2011). At the other end are countries that have either completely legalized, or at least permit, all forms of online gambling. These include Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, Gibraltar, Liechtenstein, Netherland Antilles, Panama, the Philippines, Slovakia, and the United Kingdom. In the middle are countries that have put some legal restrictions on it. For example, many countries allow certain forms (most typically online lotteries, instant lotteries, sports betting, horse racing) and make other forms illegal (most typically, casino games). Countries with this policy include Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canadian provinces, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macau, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United States. Several jurisdictions allow participation in online gambling from domestic sites, but prohibit residents from accessing online gambling outside the country. Jurisdictions with this approach include Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Norway, Slovenia, South Korea, and the United States. Some countries go further to restrict patronage of domestic online sites to residents only (e.g., Austria, Canadian provinces, Finland, the Philippines). Finally, a few countries permit online gambling, but prohibit their own residents from accessing these sites (e.g., Australia for online casinos, Malta, Papua New Guinea).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.206 · 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