MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114260797 · doi:10.1017/s1472669606000090

Sources of Legal Information in Hungary: Part 1

2006· article· en· W2114260797 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLegal Information Management · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHungarian Social, Economic and Educational Studies
Canadian institutionsLibrary of Parliament
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationState (computer science)Political scienceLawLegal opinionThe InternetLegal researchComputer scienceBlack letter lawWorld Wide WebComparative lawAlgorithmPrivate law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following an introduction to the Hungarian legal system, highlighting some of the main events of the history of the Hungarian state and Hungarian law and reviewing the system of Hungarian legislation, this article provides sources of legal information in Hungary, including the most important acts, reference books, legal periodicals and sources of legal information in printed and electronic form and on the internet. It has been contributed by Tamás Böszörményi, Eszter Horváth, Tibor Kövér and Krisztina Orphanides.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · 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