Skip to main content
Public research / comparative programs

Antitrust Radar research architecture

Research Topic Comparison Studio

Compare research topics, publication histories, and shared evidence. Missing coverage remains visible and is not treated as a zero economic outcome.

Opening evidence topology20 repeated IDs
Institutional research topics selected for comparisonEight research topic nodes surround an exact-evidence core. Selected topics are emphasized and connect only when their current contracts repeat at least one exact identifier.AR-T01AR-T02AR-T03AR-T04AR-T05AR-T06AR-T07AR-T08EXACTEVIDENCE
Opening topicEdge = repeated exact IDPosition = layout only
Topic universe
8
institutional contracts
Opening set
2
two to four at a time
Memberships
71
exact selected assignments
Shared custody
20
deduplicated identifiers
Boundary
No score
native counts remain separate

Comparison standard. Topics connect only through exact publication IDs, agenda-question IDs, issue-program IDs, dataset IDs, or route paths. Shared custody does not establish shared findings, methods, importance, legal relevance, or causation.

Evidence standard

Research program comparison

2 institutional topics

71 memberships / 51 unique items / reviewed through Jul 21, 2026
Comparison set

Select two to four research topics

2 / 4
Memberships
71
Selected topic assignments
Unique items
51
Deduplicated by lane and ID
Shared custody
20
Exact items in two or more topics
Coverage cells
10/10
0 structural zeros
Shared datasets
5
2 shared publications

Comparative evidence note

What this selection establishes

Digital / Markets
01 / Common custody

20 exact items span every selected topic.

20 exact identifiers recur in two or more selected contracts. The widest pair is Digital Platforms with Market Structure: 20 shared items.

Shared in 2+
20
Shared by all
20
Shared publications
2
Pubs 2 Agenda 12 Issues 1 Data 5 Routes 0
02 / Coverage frontier

5 of 5 lanes appear in every selected topic.

0 structural-zero cells remain across the selected contracts. A zero records the current editorial inventory, not the absence of relevant real-world evidence.

Universal
5
Partial
0
Absent
0
Present across every topicPubs, Agenda, Issues, Data, and Routes

Exact membership matrix

Five evidence lanes, kept in native counts

Select a cell to inspect repeated identifiers in that lane.
Publicationseditions
Agenda questionsquestions
Issue programsprograms
Public datasetsdatasets
Analysis routesroutes

Bar length is normalized within each row for legibility. Counts retain their own units and are never added into a score.

Publication architecture

Six permanent series footprints

Publication editions may carry more than one exact topic membership.

Comparison contract

Public questions and interpretation boundaries

Shared custody does not erase topic-specific scope.
AR-T02

Digital Platforms

How do defaults, distribution, data access, interoperability, and adjacent-platform positions shape entry across separately measured digital systems?
Mandate

Trace usage and referral screens into exact product, operator, official-record, and research links while keeping every digital denominator separate.

Boundary

Search, browser, mobile operating system, social referral, and AI-assistant usage are separate screens. Their adjacency does not establish one ecosystem market, common control, or a combined concentration measure.

AR-T01

Market Structure

Where is market power concentrated, how is structure changing, and which competitive mechanism still needs to be tested?
Mandate

Connect definition-bound concentration measures, participant shares, historical movement, and public research questions without collapsing unlike markets into one score.

Boundary

A concentration measure is a screen inside its stated product, geography, denominator, and period. It is not by itself proof of market power, harm, causation, liability, or the correct legal market.

Comparison boundary. Research topics are editorial navigation contracts assembled from exact publication themes and declared links to agenda questions, issue programs, datasets, and analytical routes. A topic does not create a legal market, make unlike units comparable, rank research importance, or establish market power, harm, liability, policy performance, welfare, or causation. Structural zeros remain visible as current coverage gaps.

Reproducibility contract

One selection, exact memberships, reusable rows.

The studio derives every matrix cell, edge, and register row from the same topic model published through the public data endpoint.

01

Exact join keys

Publication, agenda, issue, and dataset identifiers plus canonical route paths create the comparison ledger.

02

Visible structural zeros

Empty membership lanes remain explicit and are never imputed from adjacent research programs.

03

Portable evidence

Selected topic summaries and membership-level comparison packets are available as JSON and CSV.