MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Improvement of Civil Pretrial Procedures in China: the Comparison of Pretrial Procedures in China, Japan and South Korea

2011· article· en· W1764567595 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Han Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalBurden of proofChinaPolitical scienceCivil procedureHumanitiesLawLegislationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China has provided procedures for pre-trial preparation, such procedures have serious defects based on current legislative and judicial situations. Therefore, they are unable to perform appropriate functions. We therefore analyzed the defects pretrial procedures and discussed a possible reformation of pre-trial procedures based on the successful experiences in other countries and actual conditions in China. Key words: Pre-trial procedure; Time limit for the burden of proof; The exchange of evidence Resume le code de la procedure civile chinoise a defini les preparations de la procedure civile avant l’audiance au tribunal. Cependant, vu les conditions actuelles en matiere de la legislation et de la juridicition, cette procedure demeure gravement defaillante sans pouvoir fonctionner correctement. Le present document anaylyse les defauts existants dans les preparations de la procedure civile prealable chinoise. Compte tenu des conditions actuelles de la Chine et avec les experiences utiles etrangeres, le present document met en avant la discussion sur les preparations prealable de la procedure civile de la Chine. Mots-cles: Procedure civile preaable; Delai pour l'echange de preuves provisoire des procedures d'une preuv; Echange d’epreuves

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207