MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1806804881

가족관계의 변화와 젠더

2010· article· ko· W1806804881 on OpenAlex
최성경

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

Venue민사법학 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Topics in Contemporary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLegislatureLawPolitical scienceWonderSociologyPsychologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been a lot of modifications in Law in Korea. Recently, there was reform of Law and accordingly on Registrations of Relations are in effect since first of January in 2008, and a Family Register has been reformed and valid since ninth of November in 2009. This reflects the legislative efforts to meet the changes requested by our society. There has been exception. though. it is the area of same sex marriage. The prejudice against homosexual love makes same sex relations difficult to get into legislative system. The tendency to consider the legislation for same sex relations as fostering them makes it difficult. The problem of same sex couples is the inclination of sex, though, so the enactment does not increase the same sex couples, It only discloses them. It is not the concern of this study that if same sex couples are right morally. This only turns attention to their existence though there is no legislation for them. Then at this moment when they are in existence and participating in society. I wonder if it is right to ignore the enactment on same sex couples. This study is to introduce An Act Respecting certain Aspects of Legal Capacity for Marriage for Civil Purposes (Civil Marriage Act. S. C. 2005, c. 33.) which has endowed legislative solution on same sex marriage in Canada. Civil Marriage Act was enacted on 20th of July in 2005 in Canada. This was to provide legislative solution to otherwise divided opinions on same sex marriage, After series of debates on status by law of same sex couples socially and lawfully since supreme court had judged constitutional coverage should be extended to same sex couples in 1999, federal council made a decision to exclude the segment of male and female from the traditional concept of marriage in only 6 years, The study on law systems in Canada is scarce despite its close relationships to Korea both socially and nationally, Furthermore though Canada was fourth nation to make same sex marriage legal in 2005, this was not known widely in Korea. So, this study was intended to introduce Civil Marriage Act in Canada and contemplate issues on same sex marriage, Even though the legislative decision in Canada cannot be applied directly to Korean law system due to the differences in law and enforcement systems, the decisions of court and enacting processes can provide references, In this way, this study is intended to provide informations on repairing and applying law system in Korea through evaluations on enactment of Civil Marriage Act. progresses on judicial decisions in Canada and issues on same sex marriage as progresses on law theory were made.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.315 · 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