MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804422919

Ownership of Open Data: Governance Options for Agriculture and Nutrition

2016· article· en· W2804422919 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy de Beer

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen dataBusinessIntellectual propertyProperty rightsCorporate governanceAgricultureInternet privacyLaw and economicsPublic economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsFinanceLawComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ownership rights are a major factor in access and use of open data, distinct from yet as important as the availability of education, skills, technology, infrastructure, and finances. There are real deficits in law, understanding, and frameworks for governing open data ownership. These challenges must be addressed to achieve meaningful and equitable open data as default. The chief policy lesson from this paper is that moving to a model where data is open as default requires change in legal, social and technological norms, which all influence ownership of agriculture and nutrition data. Copyrights are not the only, nor even most important, legal rights establishing ownership of data. Relevant legal rights that facilitate access to and use of data at the international, national and subnational level include copyrights, database rights, technical protection measures, trade secrets, and patents and plant breeders’ rights, privacy and even tangible property rights. The open data community must broaden its engagement in all these areas to address emerging challenges.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207