Research Handbook on the Interpretation and Enforcement of Intellectual Property under WTO Rules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contents: Preface INTERPRETATION, ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 1. The Applicability of GATT Jurisprudence to the Interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement Susy Frankel 2. TRIPS-Plus-Plus Initiatives on Broad Border Measures: Features and Implications Xuan Li 3. Lessons from the United States in Regard to the Recent, More Flexible Application of Injunctive Relief Joshua D. Sarnoff 4. Accession to the WTO, Intellectual Property Rights and Domestic Institutions Ermias Tekeste Biadgleng 5. The WTO Dispute on Trademarks and Geographical Indications: Some Implications for Trade Policy-Making and Negotiations David Vivas-Eugui and Maria Julia Oliva 6. United States - Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act: Summary and Analysis Dalindyebo Shabalala 7. WTO Panel on United States - Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act Maximiliano Santa Cruz 8. Dispute Settlement Under the TRIPS Agreement: The United States - Brazil (2000) and United States - Argentina (2002) Patent Disputes Viviana Munoz Tellez 9. Canada - Patent Protection of Pharmaceutical Products Pedro Roffe and Christoph Spennemann 10. Mandatory Regulation versus Discretionary Regulation, Unilateralism, and National Treatment: An Analysis of the United States - Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998 Dispute Christophe Charlier 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.023 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".