MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921953549 · doi:10.17161/jcel.v3i1.7697

A Pilot Study of Fan Fiction Writer’s Legal Information Behavior

2019· article· en· W2921953549 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rebecca Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Copyright in Education & Librarianship · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegal writingSubject (documents)Legal fictionWork (physics)Political scienceLawMedia studiesAdvertisingPublic relationsSociologyLegal researchEngineeringComputer scienceBusinessWorld Wide WebMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fan fiction, a genre using pre-existing and often copyrighted media as a springboard for new stories, raises several legal challenges. While fans may benefit from copyright limitations, their actual knowledge of and ability to exercise their legal rights is unclear, due to limited empirical work with fan writers on this subject. This is especially true of Canadian fans, who are underrepresented in the literature. 
 
 This paper reports on a pilot study of Canadian and US fan writers’ legal knowledge, information behavior, and overall perceptions of law. It addresses background, methods, preliminary results, and future directions.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

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 communication0.0000.006
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Copyright in Education & LibrarianshipSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207