MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566240044 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v10n1p127

The Nullity of Non-Remarriage Condition in the Legal Mind and Judicial Decisions of the Islamic Republic of Iran Civil Law

2016· article· en· W2566240044 on OpenAlex
Ebrahim Taghizadeh, Seyed Ali Tabatabaee Far

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Rights and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemarriageLawCivil law (Civil law)Political scienceIslamPublic lawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the validity of man non-remarriage condition in Iran Civil law by using the judicial and legal analysis in descriptive and analytical method. The purpose of this study is to resolve some of the ambiguities surrounding this condition of the marriage document that can be used for the Bureau of family Court, lawyers, and other legal entities. Our survey shows that although there is no clear wording of the law in the Iran legal system. According to the judicial decisions and some of the Articles such as 959 and 942 in Civil law and the 1201/7 vote of the Supreme Court, it seems that non-remarriage condition in Iran Civil law is considered as instances of general negation and void, but its nullity does not impair the validity of the marriage.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.282 · 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