MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2002939351 · doi:10.1515/gpr.2013.10.4.220

Im Luftraum der Methode

2013· article· de· W2002939351 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christian Baldus

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für das Privatrecht der Europäischen Union · 2013
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In its Espada Sánchez ruling, the ECJ applies the Montreal Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air by drawing on Public International Law rules. Passengers are granted a right to compensation even if their lost items had been checked in in another passenger’s name. However, the Court is quite reluctant to interfere with national rules on evidence. It remains uncertain whether or not this self-restraint may turn out to be helpful in the long run for the necessities of the single market. Résumé Dans l’arrêt Espada Sánchez, la Cour de Justice applique la Convention de Montréal pour l’unification de certaines règles relatives au transport aérien international selon les règles d’interprétation du droit international public. Elle reconnaît le droit à indemnisation en cas de perte d’une pièce de bagage même au cas où le bagage avait été enregistré au nom d’un autre passager, tout en démontrant une très grande prudence quant à des possibles ingérences dans les règles de preuve nationales. Il reste à voir si cette ligne, à la longue, sera compatible avec les exigences du marché intérieur.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1010.052

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für das Privatrecht der Europäischen Union→Same topicInternational Law and Aviation→French-language works237,207→