MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067056206 · doi:10.7202/043002ar

L'obligation de navigabilité et le transport maritime sous connaissement

2005· article· fr· W2067056206 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guy Lefèbvre

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceObligationPhilosophyArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le régime uniforme des Règles de La Haye en matière de responsabilité contractuelle du transporteur maritime repose sur son obligation d'exercer une diligence raisonnable relativement à la navigabilité du navire. Dans un premier temps, cette étude cerne le contenu de cette obligation. L'auteur démontre que la notion de navigabilité dépasse largement le simple concept de flottabilité. En fait, l'obligation de navigabilité couvre des sujets aussi variés que la bonne condition des diverses composantes servant à la manoeuvre du navire, de son armement avec un personnel compétent et suffisant ainsi que de son aptitude au transport et à la conservation des marchandises. Dans un deuxième temps, l'auteur analyse l'exécution de l'obligation de navigabilité. Il traite des difficultés liées aux soins qui doivent être assumés par le transporteur et des complications relatives à sa preuve lors de l'exercice de l'action en responsabilité. En conclusion, l'auteur souligne le caractère désuet du régime légal actuellement en vigueur et se prononce en faveur de l'adhésion aux règles adoptées lors de la Conférence des Nations Unies de Hambourg en 1978.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207