MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481730860

유엔전자협약의 주요규정의 개요와 실무적용상의 유의점

2006· article· ko· W1481730860 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue한국사회과학연구 · 2006
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionElectronic communicationLawNeutralityAutonomyPolitical scienceLaw and economicsState (computer science)Scope (computer science)BusinessTelecommunicationsEngineeringComputer scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As we have seen, I give an outline of the main provisions of UN Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications on Int'l Contracts and notable points on its application in practice, which already adopted, at sixtieth session of the General Assembly. The conclusions are as follows: As comments of the Chinese Government on the Draft Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in Int'l Contracts, UN Electronic Convention avoided, to the extent possible, interference of the domestic laws of a Contracting State, maintains the principle of party autonomy, does not deal with substantive subject of contact laws, like as the validity of contact and liabilities of concerned parties and also provisions of regulatory nature, avoids a dual regimes of contract law in same trade dealing with only special issues regarding to the use of electronic communications on the formation and performance of a contract. It also retains the principles of functional equivalence between paper form and electronic form and technological neutrality. Therefore, it is a stand-alone instrument regarding to legal recognition on electronic communications and can contribute to remove the legal obstacles to use of electronic communications exchanged under other int'l conventions. But in the view of point from article 1, 19, 20, the convention give an excessively broad scope of application, which was unusual in int'l trade related instruments. So participation of the convention from a number of state might not be expected in consideration of strong disagreeing of singapore, Canada, France, China regarding to, in particularly, form requirements. When the parties trade with the country, in particularly, like a Russia, they can meet its form requirement through the principle of party autonomy and then have to seek their own safety in the facilitation of convention because it was submitted that unrestricted party autonomy could undermine the entire convention and could permit parties to derogate from mandatory national laws. The electronic convention definitely is a stand-alone instrument but when it is used in connection with the UNCITRAL instruments listed in article 20, paragraph 1, as far as electronic communications exchanged under the existing int'l conventions, it can do duty as, for example, e-CISG but if its use separates from them, it can not be maintained relationship with them like as relationship between e-UCP and UCP.

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.

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), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.875
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.016

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · 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