MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mandatory Rules of the Rome I Regulation: Not "Old Wine in New Bottles" RÈGLES IMPÉRATIVES DE RÈGLEMENT ROME I: PAS DE "VIEUX VIN DANS DE NOUVELLES BOUTEILLES"

2011· article· fr· W2156799455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wang Lei

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionAutonomyPolitical scienceLawConflict of lawsChoice of lawHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: From the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations (the Rome Convention) to the Rome I Regulation, mandatory rules (provisions) have been in a controversial situation for a long period. The effect of the mandatory rules on contracts and their correlation with party autonomy are also debatable in private international law area. Party autonomy is always thought as one of the basic principles of international contracts. It has been paid much attention to since the first day it existed. So it is not surprising that 'the delineation of the proper ambit of party autonomy, and the extent to which it should be subordinated to mandatory law or public-policy principles, preoccupies much private-international-law scholarship.' As the Rome I Regulation come into force, the new article about mandatory rules has brought more debates than ever before. Whether the new article in the Rome I Regulation has its own innovation or not and what is its effect upon party autonomy have also been argued fiercely.Key words: Mandatory Rules; Rome I Regulation; Rome ConventionResume: De la Convention sur la loi applicable aux obligations contractuelles (Convention de Rome) de Reglement Rome I, les regles imperatives (provisions) etaient dans une situation controversee pendant une longue periode. L'effet des regles imperatives sur les contrats et leur correlation avec l'autonomie des parties sont egalement discutables dans le domaine de droit international prive. L'autonomie des parties est toujours consideree comme l'un des principes de base des contrats internationaux. On lui a donne beaucoup d'attention depuis le premier jour de son existence. Il n'est donc pas etonnant que «la delimitation de la portee adequate de l'autonomie des parties, et la mesure dans laquelle il devrait etre subordonne au droit imperatif ou aux principes de politique publique, preoccupe beaucoup les experts de droit international prive.” Comme le Reglement Rome I entre en vigueur, le nouvel article sur les regles imperatives a apporte plus de debats que jamais. Le fait que le nouvel article dans le Reglement Rome I a sa propre innovation ou non et quel est son effet sur l'autonomie des parties ont aussi discutes ferocement. Mots cles: Regles imperatives; Reglement Rome I; Convention de Rome

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207