MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2231785348

Defending non Patrimonial Rights in the Draft of the European Civil Code

2011· article· en· W2231785348 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mihaela Agheniţei

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Contract Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil codeHullCode (set theory)Political scienceLawComputer scienceProgramming languageEngineeringMarine engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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that are very brief, contained in art. 54-56 of Decree No. 31/1954, on natural and legal persons, which is to be repealed with the entry into force of the new Civil Code.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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0050.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.306
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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 venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicEuropean and International Contract LawFrench-language works237,207