MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2542946643 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n9p143

Investigating the Legal Foundations of the Rule of Pride to Analyze the Application and Concrete Examples of this Principle in Shiite Jurisprudence

2016· article· en· W2542946643 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Moradali Maleki, Seyed Ebrahim Mousavi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTorture, Ethics, and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrideJurisprudenceHarmLiabilityEnforcementLawLaw and economicsLegal liabilitySociologyPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the factors affecting to create responsibility is deceiving, this means that if onedeceives someone else or someone fooled. For example, in marriage husband or wife deceived other or in sale contract the buyer deceived seller and deceiving in this case created the responsibility and liability, this type of responsibility is the liability in legal terms is called pride guarantee that is kind of guarantee in law enforcement and civil liability remembered it.In the study, we are tried toexamine proud guarantee in Iran's rights and Shiite. According to classic principles of responsibility to guarantee that pride be justified on the basis of the theory of fault, which are according to this theory, in addition to fault, other elements such as the arrival of harm must be proven and even limiting reference rightofproud those losses realized is not incompatible with the theory of fault.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicTorture, Ethics, and LawFrench-language works237,207