MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034453567

Treatment of Exclusionary Abuses under Article 82 of the EC Treaty: Comments on the European Commission's Guidance Paper

2009· book· en· W7034453567 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

VenueIRIS - Institutional Research Information System (Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi Sociali Guido Carli) · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Innovation and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommissionInterpretation (philosophy)Task (project management)European commissionEnforcementSet (abstract data type)Task force
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 2008, the European Commission issued a Guidance paper setting out its enforcement priorities in applying Article 82 to abusive exclusionary conduct. In response, CEPS formed a Task Force of legal scholars, practicing attorneys and corporate counsel to debate and comment on this latest Guidance paper and to issue recommendations aimed at improving the Commission’s text and the interpretation of the rules it contains. Even if the Commission does not issue a revised version of the Guidance paper, the members of the Task Force hope that their comments will be useful to the Commission in its application of the principles set out in the Guidance paper and to national courts in their interpretation of the Guidance paper.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.270 · 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