Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contents: Introduction Part I The Meaning of Dominance and Monopolization: Monopolization and abuse of dominance in Canada, the United States, and the European Union: a survey, Brian A. Facey and Danny H. Assaf The abuse of Hoffman-La Roche: the meaning of dominance under EC competition law, Frances Dethmers and Ninette Dodoo Market Power: Market definition: an analytical overview, Jonathan B. Baker Markets without substitutes: substitution versus constraints as the key to market definition, Cento Veljanovski Assigning market shares, Gregory J. Werden Application of the concept of barriers to entry under Article 82 of the EC Treaty: is there a case for review?, Oluseye Arowolo Joint Dominance/Oligopoly: Oligopoly and the antitrust laws: a suggested approach, Richard A. Posner Considering the oligopoly problem, Craig Callery Interpreting the boundaries of collective dominance in Article 102 TFEU, Felix E. Mezzanotte. Part II Abuse and Violation: Pricing Practices: Predatory pricing and related practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, Phillip Areeda and Donald F. Turner Exclusionary pricing and price discrimination abuses under Article 82 - an economic analysis, Derek Ridyard Excessive prices within EU competition law, Liyang Hou Refusal to Supply: The essential facilities doctrine under US antitrust law, Robert Pitofsky, Donna Patterson and Jonathan Hooks Harmonizing essential facilities, Spencer Weber Waller and William Tasch The rise and fall of the essential facility doctrine, Ulf MA ller and Anselm Rodenhausen Margin Squeeze: Margin squeeze abuse, Liam Colley and Sebastian Burnside. Part III Dominance/Monopolization and Intellectual Property Rights: Unilateral refusals to deal in intellectual and other property, Howard A. Shelanski Challenges of the new economy: issues at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property, Robert Pitofsky Antitrust in the new economy, Robert A. Posner Limiting the scope of Article 82 EC: what can the EU learn from the US Supreme Court's judgment in Trinko in the wake of Microsoft, IMS and Deutsche Telekom?, Damien Geradin Name index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".