MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161960574 · doi:10.82308/3329

Regulation of takeover bids in Ontario

2001· dissertation· en· W7161960574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena V. Petrova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShareholderEquity (law)TransferabilityLegislatureTender offerCapital (architecture)Equity capital

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Takeovers play an important role in the economy as they serve to reallocate economic resources to more efficient uses and replace inefficient management. Unregulated takeover bids pose a threat to the interests of the target company shareholders. The legislature pays special attention to takeover bids to make sure that the bona fide interests of the target company shareholders are duly protected. This is the primary purpose of the takeover bid regulation in Ontario. The regulation is also aimed at ensuring the horizontal equity among target shareholders and the efficient functioning of the capital market. This thesis analyzes the present regulation of takeover bids in Ontario and argues that while the whole system of takeover bid regulation is consistent with the proclaimed purposes, there are two issues that fall out of the coherent structure. The restriction on free transferability of shares and the adoption by boards of directors of shareholder rights plans do not enhance the protection of target company shareholders and do not correspond to the proclaimed purposes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207