MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200581377 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v23i5.4567

Fool’s Gold? Constitution, Sovereignty and the Golden Share in Embraer-Boeing Case

2021· article· en· W4200581377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rodrigo Oliveira Salgado, Fábio Sampaio Mascarenhas, Marcus Vinícius Silva de Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBrazilian Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEmbraer
KeywordsVetoSovereigntyConstitutionJoint ventureObligationEconomicsPower (physics)LawPolitical scienceLaw and economicsCommercePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The object of this article is to analyze the Golden Share (Ação de Classe Especial) as an instrument of economic sovereignty. It questions whether, legally, there is a possibility of imposing on the Executive Branch the use of the veto power inherent to the golden share in cases where a joint venture of a foreign company with a state-owned company represents a risk to national sovereignty. The hypothesis is that based on the principle of economic sovereignty (art. 170, I), there is an express obligation to the administration to veto in the case where a joint venture of a foreign company with a national company harms the domestic market (art. 219). It concludes that in the mentioned cases there is the possibility of imposing the use of the veto power to the Executive Branch, in case of omission, it is competence of the National Congress, and subsidiarily to the Judiciary Branch, due to the imposing nature of the constitutional principle of economic sovereignty.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicBrazilian Legal IssuesFrench-language works237,207