General Concepts of Private Law Relating to Private Property in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and in the Civil Code of Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paperidentifies some notable features on general private law ordering contained in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. It does so by contrasting these provisions with similar articles and doctrine from the Civil Code of Quebec. The author points out several unique features of the Russian code and speculates on some of the potential implications of these features for private law ordering. These comments are meant to stimulate discussion and comparison, and are not meant to be exhaustive in either their descriptive content or substantive analysis. The Russian code convers similar conceptual territory as the Quebec code; thus, the organizing concepts are analogous. It is therefore not surprising that the animating themes of private laaw in the civilist tradition, major distinctions such as patrimonial and extra-patrimonial rights, real and personal rights, and various sub categories, find expression in the Russian code. The elaboration of these ideas is generally much extensive in the Russian code that in the Quebec code, although the iteration in the latter is arguably more concise, clear and coherent.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".