MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6964311016 · doi:10.26180/12486524

Joshua Yuvaraj and Rebecca Giblin, 'Why Were Commonwealth Reversionary Rights Abolished (And What Can We Learn Where They Remain?)' (2019) 41(4) European Intellectual Property Review 232

2021· article· en· W6964311016 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonash University · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCopyright and Intellectual Property
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsCommonwealthIntellectual propertyProperty (philosophy)Property rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Paper we examine the development and removal of the 1911 Imperial copyright reversion right. We find this right was spuriously removed in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. We then find that criticisms of the right in Canada (it still exists there) can help teach us what a new, effective reversion right might look like. This abstract is from a version of this paper accepted for publication in vol 41(4) of the European Intellectual Property Review (2019). The final version published contains very slight amendments.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 venueMonash UniversitySame topicCopyright and Intellectual PropertyFrench-language works237,207