MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2878785072 · doi:10.1021/cen-09627-buscon4

Dow wins $1 billion judgment against Nova

2018· article· en· W2878785072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alex Tullo

Bibliographic record

VenueC&EN Global Enterprise · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLaw, AI, and Intellectual Property
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova (rocket)AeronauticsPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dow Chemical won a round in one of two big lawsuits against Nova Chemicals. A Canadian court has issued a judgment of $1 billion in Dow’s favor in litigation over Nova’s conduct in running an ethylene joint venture between the two companies in Joffre, Alberta. Before the Court of Queen’s Bench, Dow alleged that between 2001 and 2012, Nova siphoned off more than its fair share of ethylene from their venture and that it ran the facility at lower operating rates than it should have. Nova said it was justified in taking the ethylene that it did and that the lower operating rates were due to feedstock shortages and mechanical issues at the plant. It further said that Dow was in breach of its contract when it procured feedstocks for its own operations in Alberta. Nova signed the original joint venture agreement in 1997 with Dow predecessor Union Carbide, which

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.255
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueC&EN Global EnterpriseSame topicLaw, AI, and Intellectual PropertyFrench-language works237,207