Current Positions of the Collegial Bodies of the FAS Russia on the Application of Antimonopoly Legislation in Cases of Misapplication of Dominance (on the Example of the Cases of the IV Quarter of 2022)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reveals the modern attitudes of the Collegial bodies of the Federal Antimonopoly Service, used in the framework of the revision of decisions of territorial antimonopoly administrations on cases of misapplication of dominance. It is important to note that the positions of the Collegial bodies of the FAS Russia are significant important in antimonopoly law enforcement practice. Interpretation of competition law by the appellate boards of the antimonopoly service, among other things, contributes to maintaining the uniformity of law enforcement practice and clarifying certain provisions of the antitrust law. In this regard the cases considered by the Collegial bodies of the FAS Russia are important for the development of antitrust practice. To disclose the current positions of the FAS Russia more fully and practically on various issues of antimonopoly enforcement, the article will analyze some examples of cases considered by the agency in the fourth quarter of 2022.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".