MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196471942 · doi:10.1590/2317-6172202124

Law and Politics in FCPA Prosecutions of Foreign Corporations

2021· article· en· W3196471942 on OpenAlex
Elizabeth Acorn

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Direito GV · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign Corrupt Practices ActExpansiveJurisdictionPoliticsLawEnforcementPolitical scienceLaw and economicsBusinessSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The expansive reach of US prosecutions addressing corporate and economic crimes has piqued the interest of many commentators and scholars. This is perhaps nowhere more evident than in the enforcement of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) against non-American corporations. The US adopted the FCPA in 1977 to ban the payment of bribes to foreign public officials to obtain a business advantage—decades before most other countries did so and with jurisdiction over American and many foreign corporations. More than 40 years after the creation of the FCPA, this article reviews and outlines a growing interdisciplinary research agenda that considers historical, legal, and political influences on the application of the FCPA to foreign corporations. In addition to mapping the contours of this growing research agenda, the article identifies several challenges for such research and proposes potential avenues for future research that promise to deepen our understanding of why and when the US makes use of its expansive jurisdiction to prosecute foreign corporations for bribery of foreign public officials.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · 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