MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2365772559

Comment on the Case:The Chinese Company Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Industrial Co.Ltd.Seeks the Enforcement of PRC Court Judgment against the American Company Robinson Helicopter Company Inc for the Damages Caused by Its Supplied Defective Helicopter

2009· article· en· W2365772559 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaole Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplaintLawSummary judgmentLawsuitPlaintiffStatuteCause of actionAction (physics)LiabilityDamagesPolitical scienceTortBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is about the case Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Industrial Co.,Ltd.v.Robinson Helicop-ter Company Inc.The helicopter designed and manufactured by Robinson Helicopter Company Inc.,(RHC)crashed into the Yangtze River.The complaint in the California State Action alleged damagesfrom the crash against RHC based on theories of negligence,strict liability,and breach of implied warranty.RHC moved to stay or dismiss the California State Action on the ground of forum non conveniens,but didn't attend the trial in China.Later,the plaintiffs filed their complaint in this action seeking to enforce the PRC Judgment.However' the district Court granted Summary Judgment in favor of defendant on the ground that the statute of limitations had expired before the Chinese lawsuit was filed.The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its memorandum decision in this case ruling the action in the PRC was not barred by the statute of limitations.Finally,the United States District Court California recog-nized the PRC judgment.This article briefly introduced the facts of the case,analyzed the reasoning of the Court's decision,then commented on some legal issues of this case.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0430.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207