Defending non Patrimonial Rights in the Draft of the European Civil Code
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The draft of the new Civil Code includes Book I, "About Persons", a special title on protection of non-patrimonial rights by specific legal means (Title V - "Defending non patrimonial rights"), made as a result of development and modernization of existing provisions, that are very brief, contained in art. 54-56 of Decree No. 31/1954, on natural and legal persons, which is to be repealed with the entry into force of the new Civil Code. The nowadays legislator has shown a constant preoccupation on the protection of one’s personal rights. Currently, the most comprehensive national regulations are, de lege lata, in the Quebec Civil Code of 1991 (art. 10-40) - which is one of the main models of the new Romanian Civil Code project – and in the Swiss Civil Code (art. 27, 28, 28a-28l, 29), which is why these modern and highly effective regulations have been the main source of inspiration for the editors of the New Romanian Civil Code (see: art. 58-91, regarding to the respect of human being and its inherent rights, art. 262-274, regarding to the defense of non-property rights). After the Second World War, some regulations regarding the personality rights were introduced in other European civil codes too, with the affirmation and delineation of these rights in the jurisprudence and in the doctrine.
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 | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".