MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vertical Restraints Across Jurisdictions

2015· book-chapter· en· W972112370 on OpenAlexaff
Ralph A. Winter, Ed Iacobucci

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMerger and Competition Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVertical restraintsUpstream (networking)Competition (biology)Downstream (manufacturing)IncentiveBusinessVertical integrationSupply chainResale price maintenanceIndustrial organizationCompetition lawVariety (cybernetics)EconomicsMicroeconomicsMarketingMonopolyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Firms in a vertical relationship strike contracts that maximize joint surplus. If an increase in surplus from vertical restraints results from effects within the supply chain itself, competition policy should not intervene even if the restraints raise prices. Vertical restraints typically benefit a supply chain by correcting incentives of downstream firms to make self-interested decisions that do not serve the collective interest of the chain. In a wide variety of circumstances, for example, retailers compete excessively in prices rather than non-price dimensions such as sales effort. Vertical restraints can, on the other hand, have anticompetitive effects by facilitating cartelization of an upstream or downstream market. Only where vertical restraints negatively affect competition between supply chains should the law intervene. Antitrust law in the US increasingly reflects these principles, while the law in the EU remains overly interventionist.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicMerger and Competition AnalysisFrench-language works237,207