EC competition law : a critical assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book, co-written by a team of European competition law specialists, offers critical perspectives on the whole range of issues in EU competition law. The book has two distinctive features. The first is that, unlike similar works which present the law from either an enforcement agency or practitioner perspective in a fairly conventional manner, this work offers fresh, critical reflections on the state of the law. The second is that the authors are young academics, practitioners, and administrators who have worked in the relevant fields and who are relatively new "voices" in the competition law literature. Drawn from diverse jurisdictions and professional backgrounds, the authors bring a distinctively European feel -for instance, not drawing exclusively on English language literature- and manage to introduce debates that have been taking place in the non-English language world, thereby assisting a more comprehensive dialogue in this field. The diversity in their professional backgrounds means that each chapter adopts a different perspective, with some chapters focusing on practical solutions to problems, and others exploring more general theoretical questions. The textbook-like structure places the issues in their appropriate contexts and ensures that readers see how the discussion in each chapter links with the body of law as a whole. The impact of EU competition law beyond Europe also means that this book will appeal to lawyers in the US, Australia, Canada, and other countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".