Investigation and Comparison of Time and Location of Contract Conclusion in Iranian Electronic Commerce Act and UNCITRAL Model Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyberspace is considered as one of the most modern means for conclusion of contracts and meeting the obligations arising from that, particularly in commercial transactions. The nature of electronic contracts- in terms of creditability, form and homogeneity with public disciplines and regulations of civil law about the contracts- is a new topic based on which recognition and investigation on the legal effects depend on formal structure of cyberspace and information and communication technology concepts known in this area. Present work mainly investigates following items: Electronic contract conclusion and specific properties of such agreements, effect of electronic trait on its way of formation as well as compatibility of public rules and regulation of electronic contracts in Iranian Electronic Commerce Act and UNCITRAL model law. Electronic contract principally does not differ traditional ones in terms of nature. However, structure of cyberspace has brought up new specifications and concepts. A descriptive-analytical method with comparative approach were used for data collection. Current rules and regulations at contracts area in traditional space seem to not be able to completely meet emerging rights in cyberspace but beside traditional legal basics, some rules and regulations are necessary to eliminate existing confusion by setting determination in modern legal uncertainties. Present study tries to answer above queries by assessment and comparison of location and time of contract conclusion in Electronic Commerce Act and UNCITRAL Model Law.
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 | 0.006 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".