MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2388282712

The Sovereign Immunity Issues in the Cases against the Chinese Government and/or State-Owned Enterprise before the U.S.Court——Comment on the Case,Debbie and Max WALTERS,Plaintiffs,v.the People's Republic of China,Defendant

2010· article· en· W2388282712 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gong Bai-hu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSovereign immunityPlaintiffLawGovernment (linguistics)SovereigntyState (computer science)DisadvantageChinaTortBusinessLaw and economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceLiabilitySupreme court
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After default judgment was entered against People's Republic of China(PRC) in parent's prod-ucts liability action for death of their son due to allegedly defective semi-automatic rifle,parents served restraining notices and subpoenas on New York branches of Chinese banks to forbid sale or transfer PRC assets.Banks filed motion to vacate the restraining orders and quash the subpoenas.The District Court,Sidney H.Stein,J.,held that assets were located outside the United States.The FSIA provides no exception to the PRC's sovereign immunity that would justify that procedure.This article comments on the defence arguments for Chinese government on its sovereign immunity,the advantages or disadvantage for the Chinese state-owned company to claim the sovereign immunity,the execution of a default judgment on the Chinese government to the property of the Chinese state-owed company.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.018
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0250.022
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicCorporate Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207