Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, thanks to the rapid development of the manufacturing technique of aircraft, the importance of carriage by air in the international transportation of passengers is much increasing. Thus the carriage by air is much higher than that of any others(e.g., sea transportation etc.) in the international transportation of passengers. Generally, air carriage of passengers is operated at an altitude of more than thirty hundred feet. Thus air transportation is always confronted with the occurrence of air accidents giving rise to complications between air carrier and the victim. For the mediation of controversy being concerned with liability of compensation for damages between the two parties, international cooperations(e.g., Warsaw Convention of 1929, Montreal Convention of 1999 etc.) are accomplished in the private law relating to air carriage. But there is no regulations on the complications between air carrier and passengers and con-signors in Korea. In 2008, to solve this problems the Ministry of Justice has made the draft bill on the carriage by air. This draft bill applies to all international carriage of persons, baggage or cargo performed by aircraft for reward. It applies equally to gratuitous carriage by aircraft performed by an air transport undertaking. But there are many problems in the draft bill on carriage by air made by the Ministry of Justice. In this paper, thus, I have investigated the legal problems of provisions of the draft bill with regard to advance payments, successive carriage, actual carrier & contracting carrier, limitation of actions, scope of application of draft bill on the carriage by air, liability of the carrier and extent of compensation for damage, air carrier's right of disposition of cargo etc.. And I have suggested the measures for Improvement on the Legal Problems of the Draft Bill on Carriage by Air under the Current Laws.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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".