MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312039694 · doi:10.18601/16571959.n34.01

Jurisprudencia y laudos arbitrales sobre competencia desleal en la relación contractual

2022· article· es· W4312039694 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.

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

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista La Propiedad Inmaterial · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative International Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGeographyPolitical scienceJurisprudenceCartographyPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artículo analiza la legislación, la jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia y la doctrina expuesta en laudos arbitrales, para demostrar que en Colombia la competencia desleal no puede ser definida como responsabilidad civil extracontractual. De las cuatro áreas del derecho que han abordado la competencia desleal, tres de ellas se basan en legislación positiva y ninguna excluye su aplicación a la relación contractual. Las sentencias de casación proferidas bajo el Código de Comercio y la Ley 256 resaltan el carácter preventivo de este régimen, que no requiere daño para ser aplicado. Los laudos arbitrales demuestran que sí es posible arbitrar conflictos de competencia desleal en relaciones contractuales, con base en una cláusula compromisoria.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · 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