Bibliographic record
Abstract
List of Sponsors List of Participants Introduction - Regulating Mergers: Substantive and Procedural Issues, Judicial Review, International Convergence and Best Practices Mel Marquis Introduction to the Workshop Presentation Written contribution Irwin Stelzer, Merger Policy and Schumpeter's Creative and Destructive Gale Panel 1 Merger enforcement across jurisdictions: Substantive issues (market definition, entry barriers/potential competition, unilateral/coordinated effects, innovation, efficiencies) Written contributions to Panel Kirsten Edwards, Estimating Diversion Ratios: Some Thoughts on Customer Survey Design C. Scott Hemphill, Higher Profits as a Merger Defense: Innovation, Appropriability and the Horizontal Merger Guidelines Barry Hawk, A Tale of Two Cities: Washington and Brussels Face the Courts Lars-Hendrik Roller, Efficiencies in EU Merger Control: Do They Matter? Panel 2 Merger policy assessment and judicial review Written contributions to Panel 2 Tomaso Duso, Klaus Gugler and Florian Szucs, Merger Policy Evaluation: Where Do We Stand? James S. Venit, The Scope of EU Judicial Review of Commission Merger Decisions Panel 3 Merger enforcement across jurisdictions: Procedural issues Written contributions to Panel 3 Sven Volcker, Dare to Defer? Towards Greater Procedural Efficiency in Multijurisdictional Merger Remedies Ian S. Forrester, Post Plures Unum: Streamlining and Simplifying Merger Procedures in an Era of Multijurisdictional Merger Filings Calvin S. Goldman, Contemporary US-Canada Crossborder Merger Review: Tradeoffs in Policy Objectives between Harmonization, Simplification and Accountability Panel 4 International convergence: Substantive and procedural issues and the scope for comity Written contributions to Panel 4 Andreas Mundt and Andreas Bardong, Comity, Cooperation and International Convergence - Recent Developments in German Merger Control Thomas Deisenhofer, International Cooperation in Merger Cases - An EU Practitioner's Perspective Rachel Brandenburger, Promoting International Convergence: Substantive and Procedural Challenges - the Scope for Comity William Kovacic, International Convergence: Assessing the Quality of Horizontal Merger Enforcement Adam Fanaki, Convergence in Multi-Jurisdictional Merger Reviews: A Canadian Perspective Tadashi Shiraishi, Effects on Domestic Purchasers: A Descriptive Theory for Competition Law in Cross-Border Cases Etsuko Kameoka and Mel Marquis, Recent Developments in Japan's Merger Control System Seonhoong Jeon, International Convergence and Recent Korean Experiences in Merger Control Xinzhu Zhang and Vanessa Yanhua Zhang, China's Merger Control Policy: A Three-Year Milestone Abel Mateus, The New Brazilian Merger Control Regime Maher Dabbah, Merger Control in Middle Eastern Countries: A Perspective on Challenges and Opportunities Panel 5 Merger control and best practices Written contributions to Panel 5 John Boyce, Best Practice in Merger Control: It Ain't What You Do It's the Way That You Do It ... And That's What Gets Results Jochen Burrichter and Manuel Zandt, Merger Control and Best Practice Gotz Drauz, Promoting Best Practices within and among Competition Authorities and with Business
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.010 |
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".