MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7095678079

Dynamic Competition in Telecommunications Implications for Regulatory Policy

2004· article· en· W7095678079 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitor analysisWirelineCompetition (biology)CommissionIncentivePaceGovernment (linguistics)Deregulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this issue... The federal government designs the CRTC’s regulatory policies to promote the entry of new firms into the market for wireline local access services using current facilities and technology. Yet the current pace of technological change means that competition cannot be measured simply by counting the number of competitors in the market. What is needed are incentives for firms to invest in new technologies and to compete for the market, rather than in the market, to the long-term benefit of Canadian consumers. The Study in Brief In recent years, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has adopted a range of policy initiatives designed to promote the entry of new firms into the business of providing wireline local access telephone services, and increasing the number of viable competitors in that market. Despite its efforts, however, the CRTC’s own assessment is that competition is limited even in the largest urban centres and virtually nonexistent outside them.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.019
Scholarly communication0.0190.014
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0230.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicICT Impact and Policies→French-language works237,207→