MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206155695

Trade Secrets - Canada

2021· article· en· W3206155695 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

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTrade Secret Protection Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecrecyGuard (computer science)ConfidentialityTrade secretBusiness informationBusinessCompetitor analysisValue (mathematics)Computer securityInternet privacyIntellectual propertyMarketingLawComputer sciencePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trade secret protection applies to confidential information that is generally technical in nature and which has a valuable commercial or industrial application.1 There are six non-exhaustive factors commonly analyzed by Canadian courts to determine if information is protectable as a trade secret: (1) The extent to which the information is known out- side the owner’s business; (2) The extent to which the information is known by employees and others involved in the owner’s business; (3) The extent of measures taken by the owner to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) The value of the information to the owner and its competitors; (5) The amount of money or effort expended by the owner in developing the information; (6) The ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others ( i.e., by their independent endeavours).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.344 · 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