Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims at providing a theoretical analysis of international financial leasing and discusses some controversial issues within this area. Accordingly, it is divided into three main parts. The first part of the essay probes into the definition and fundamental features of international financial leasing. Then the second part focuses on certain debatable issues in the practice field of international financial leasing. The last part of the essay aims at providing a little analysis of the UNIDROIT Convention on International financial leasing which may be of some help to know the development of international financial leasing. This part mainly discusses rights and obligations of each party of an International financial leasing contract and particular remedies of breach of contract. Then, the conclusion provides some future perspectives of international financial leasing. Key words : UNIDROIT Convention; International Financial Leasing; Private Law Resume: Cet article vise a fournir une analyse theorique de credit-bail international et examine certaines questions controversees dans ce domaine. En consequence, il est divise en trois parties principales. La premiere partie de l'essai sonde dans la definition et les caracteristiques fondamentales de credit-bail international. Puis la deuxieme partie se concentre sur certains points discutables dans le domaine de la pratique du credit-bail international. La derniere partie de l'essai vise a fournir une petite analyses sur la Convention d'UNIDROIT de credit-bail qui peut etre utile pour connaitre le developpement du credit-bail international. Cette partie traite essentiellement des droits et obligations de chaque partie d'un contrat de credit-bail international et des solutions specifiques de rupture de contrat. Ensuite, la conclusion donne quelques perspectives d'avenir de credit-bail international. Mots-cles: Convention d'Unidroit; CrEDit-Bail International; Droit PrivE
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".